Re: GBS
From: R. Daniel Braun (rd.braun@gmail.com)
Wed Aug 17 06:52:51 2005
The total unavailablity to get Penicillin (due to lack of profitability in
making it) is the main reason that Ampicillin is given.
On 8/17/05, Peter Wein <pwein@unimelb.edu.au> wrote:
>
> There is no earth;y reason to use ampicillin - GBS is sensitive to
> penicillin.
> The only reason there is insufficient evidence in UK is that they don;t
> collect data properly. Sounds like a line out of Yes Prime Minister - Sir
> Humphrey would often say that.
> Peter
>
>> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* R. Daniel Braun <rd.braun@gmail.com>
> *To:* Multiple recipients of list OB-GYN-L <ob-gyn-l@dns.obgyn.net>
> *Sent:* Wednesday, August 17, 2005 10:41 AM
> *Subject:* Re: GBS
>
> On 8/16/05, Stmidwife@aol.com <Stmidwife@aol.com> wrote:
> >
> > Thank you for posting this, very interesting..
> >
> > 1. GBS disease is the most frequent cause of infection in the
> > neonate. Assessment of the risks of GBS disease for an individual mother and
> > baby should be made by obstetricians and midwives, and timely and
> > appropriate antibiotic prophylaxis considered where necessary. Guidelines
> > should be in place and regularly audited.
> >
> > Not any more. Now it is E.coli resistant to ampicillin because of all
> the ampicillin we have been giving to treat GBBS.
>
> > 1. There is insufficient evidence at present to recommend
> > universal antenatal screening for GBS in the UK.
> >
> > The people at Parkland several years ago in two diferent studies showed
> that No screening and giving every baby an injection of Aqueous Pen G in the
> delivery room (I think it was 25000 units if under 2500 Gms and 50000 u if
> over.) This was more effective and cost, at that time, about $0.25 per
> pregnancy.
> This makes a lot more sense. There is something wrong with the baby, not
> the mother. Only 1 of every 400 colonized babies actually gets an infection.
> Let's find out what is wrong with that baby and go from there, instead of
> being stupid and giving antibiotics to all mothers in labor.
>
> > 1. Any antibiotic administration to the mother in labour for GBS
> > disease may have significant implications for the neonate and their
> > subsequent management. Antibiotic choice and dose and timing should be
> > considered carefully and the rationale and details communicated to the
> > paediatricians caring for the neonate.
> >
> > Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2005 14:16:22 +0000
> > From: "benjamin sharp" <sharp_benjamint@hotmail.com >
> > To: ob-gyn-l@obgyn.net
> > Subject: Re: GBS
> > Message-ID: < BAY101-F5A33DDAC5747CCDFEFC6A94B00@phx.gbl>
> > Mime-Version: 1.0
> > Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
> >
> > Sue
> > We take a slightly different approach. I enclose the RCOG guidelines for
> >
> > your inspection. If they don't come through then go to http://www.rcog.org.uk<http://www.rcog.org.uk/>and
> > go to the guidelines section. I find the rationale given for NOT
> > supporting
> > screening particularly well reasoned. I'd be interested to know what you
> >
> > chaps think (that's 'chaps' in the bi-gender sense of the word!)
> >
>
> --
> R. Daniel Braun
> Kinky for Governor
>
--
R. Daniel Braun
Kinky for Governor
