Key result
First trimester exposure to macrolides was not significantly associated with an increased risk of congenital heart defects compared to non-genetic controls (AOR 0.94; 95% CI 0.70-1.26).
Why the study?
The risk of congenital heart defects and other congenital anomalies associated with first trimester use of macrolides required investigation.
Does first trimester exposure to macrolide antibiotics increase the risk of congenital heart defects and other congenital anomalies in pregnant women?
Case-Control (n=145,936)
Yes
Does first trimester exposure to macrolide antibiotics increase the risk of congenital heart defects and other congenital anomalies in pregnant women?
Odds Ratio: 0.94 (95% CI 0.7–1.26)
First trimester macrolide exposure is not associated with an overall increased risk of congenital heart defects, but it may increase the risk of specific anomalies such as atrioventricular septal defects.
Reassures against broad macrolide avoidance in early pregnancy; leaves open a possible atrioventricular septal defect link requiring confirmation.
Objective To investigate the risk of congenital heart defects (CHD) and other congenital anomalies (CA) associated with first trimester use of macrolides. Design Population-based case-malformed control study. Setting Thirteen European countries. Population Data on 145,936 livebirths, stillbirths and terminations of pregnancy for CA from 15 EUROCAT registries, covering 9 million births 1995–2012. Methods Cases were babies with CHD, anencephaly, orofacial clefts, genital and limb reduction anomalies associated with antibiotic exposure in the literature. Controls were babies with other CA or genetic conditions. A meta-analysis of the literature, including this study, was conducted for CHD. Main outcome Odds ratios adjusted (AOR) for maternal age and registry, with 95% Confidence Intervals (95%CI). Results Macrolide exposure was recorded for 307 cases, 72 non-genetic controls, 57 genetic controls. AOR for CHD was not significantly raised (AOR 0.94, 95%CI: 0.70 – 1.26 vs non-genetic controls; AOR 1.01, 95%CI: 0.73 – 1.41 vs genetic controls), nor significantly raised for any specific macrolide. The risk of atrioventricular septal defect was significantly raised with exposure to any macrolide (AOR 2.98; 95%CI: 1.48 – 6.01), erythromycin (AOR 3.68, 95%CI: 1.28 – 10.61), and azithromycin (AOR 4.50, 95%CI: 1.30 – 15.58). Erythromycin, clarithromycin, azithromycin and clindamycin, were also associated with an increased risk of at least one other CA. Meta-analysis gave an overall CHD OR 1.14, 95%CI 0.90 –1.49 for macrolides. Conclusions Guidelines for macrolide use in pregnancy should consider the increased risk of specific CA. This is relevant for the potential use of azithromycin in the treatment of COVID-19.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Leke et al. (2020) conducted a case-control in Congenital heart defects and other congenital anomalies (n=145,936). Macrolide antibiotics vs. Non-genetic and genetic controls was evaluated on Congenital heart defects (CHD) (AOR 0.94, 95% CI 0.70-1.26). First trimester exposure to macrolides was not significantly associated with an increased risk of congenital heart defects compared to non-genetic controls (AOR 0.94; 95% CI 0.70-1.26).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: