Cited by 4Surgical site infection preventionAntibiotic Use and ResistanceAntibiotic Resistance in Bacteria

Multi-drug resistant surgical site infections following caesarean delivery: a prospective observational study from urban Uganda

Open access
Mbabazi, Leah, Hahn, Sarah, Sserubiri, Lawrence, Natukunda, Patience, Wamawobe, Amusa, Kajumbula, Henry, Nakate, Vivian, Lübbert, Christoph +5 more·2025·BMC Women's Health

Abstract

Background: Surgical-site infections (SSI) are a feared complication of caesarean section (CS). While the incidence of post-CS SSI is estimated at 5–10% worldwide, increasing evidence suggests that women in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) may be disproportionally affected. Due to the lack of access to routine microbiology and surveillance, data on bacterial pathogens and resistance are scarce for post-CS SSI from LMIC, and antibiotic treatment is largely empirical. Further research on common pathogens and resistance patterns is urgently needed, considering the rise of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) especially in sub-Saharan Africa. Methods: This prospective observational study aimed to describe the bacterial pathogens, resistance profiles and clinical outcomes of women with post-CS SSI at the largest national maternity hospital in Kampala, Uganda. Women with clinical signs of post-CS SSI were eligible for inclusion. Blood and deep wound swab cultures were taken for bacterial species identification and antibiotic susceptibility testing upon enrolment. Clinical follow-up assessments were conducted on days 2, 4 and at discharge. Results: From May 2021 to January 2022, 70 women were screened for study eligibility, of which 66 were enrolled and completed follow-up. The median age was 25 years (IQR 21–29), and 5 (7.6%) participants were HIV-infected. The median time between CS and diagnosis of SSI was 12.2 days (IQR 8–15). The majority of women required surgical treatment, predominantly debridement ( n = 51, 82%). A total of 80 bacterial pathogens were identified from deep wound swabs, of which the majority were Gram-negative ( n = 66, 82.5%). The most frequently isolated pathogens were Acinetobacter spp. ( n = 26, 32.5%), Escherichia ( E .) coli ( n = 18, 22.5%), and Klebsiella spp. ( n = 15, 18.8%), the majority of which were highly resistant to third-generation cephalosporins (94–100%). Additionally, a large proportion of Acinetobacter spp. isolates were resistant to carbapenems (65.4%), gentamycin (90.9%), and quinolones (85.0%). Blood cultures were negative for bacterial growth in all participants. After a median 10.7 days (IQR 5–14) of in-patient treatment, the majority of study participants made a complete recovery ( n = 59, 89.4%). Conclusions: Deep wound swabs from post-CS SSI predominantly identified multidrug resistant Gram-negative pathogens with limited antibiotic treatment options in this setting. Especially the large proportion of carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter spp. may indicate hospital-acquisition of the infections and warrants the strengthening of infection prevention and control measures, as well as antibiotic stewardship.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1186/s12905-025-04101-7

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 36 · Cited by 4

Authors
Mbabazi, L., Hahn, S., Sserubiri, L., Natukunda, P., Wamawobe, A., Kajumbula, H., Nakate, V., Lübbert, C., Musaazi, J., Nabajja, H., Stepan, H., Nsibirwa, S., & von Braun, A.
Affiliations
  • Infectious Diseases Institute (UG)
  • University Hospital Leipzig (DE)
  • Makerere University (UG)
Venue
BMC Women's Health
Published
2025-10-30
Volume
25
Issue
1
Pages
526-526
ISSN
1472-6874 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4415695313
Cited by
4
References
36
Citations by year
2026: 4
FWCI
3.76
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • BMC Women s Health (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
Universität Leipzig
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Surgical site infection prevention
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology › Antibiotic Use and Resistance
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Medicine › Antibiotic Resistance in Bacteria
Keywords
surgical site infection, cesarean section, antimicrobial resistance, multidrug resistance, Acinetobacter, Escherichia coli, Klebsiella, carbapenem resistance, third-generation cephalosporin resistance, Gram-negative bacteria, debridement, low- and middle-income countries, sub-Saharan Africa, Uganda, maternal infection, HIV infection, empirical antibiotic therapy
MeSH terms
Adult, Anti-Bacterial Agents, Cesarean Section, Female, Humans, Pregnancy, Prospective Studies, Surgical Wound Infection, Uganda, Drug Resistance, Multiple, Bacterial, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review