Post-exposure passive immunisation for preventing rubella and congenital rubella syndrome
Citation: Young M.K., Cripps A.W., Nimmo G.R., et al. Post-exposure passive immunisation for preventing rubella and congenital rubella syndrome. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2015, Issue 9. Art. No.:CD010586. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD010586.pub2.
There is insufficient evidence to make direct conclusions about the effectiveness of post‐exposure passive immunisation for preventing congenital rubella syndrome.
Infection with rubella in early pregnancy can result in miscarriage, fetal death or congenital abnormality. This review assesses 12 studies (430 participants) for the effectiveness of intramuscular injection or intravenous infusion of polyclonal immunoglobulins of human sera or plasma origin for preventing rubella and congenital rubella syndrome when administered to exposed susceptible people before the onset of disease. those receiving antibodies 39% less likely to develop rubella than those not given antibodies. In an analysis of the seven studies (89 participants) where participants had been in contact with rubella only up to five days earlier, people given the highest doses used in the studies were 80% less likely to develop rubella than those not given antibodies. Only one study included pregnant women. The studies assessing the prevention of rubella were of moderate quality because of some methodological issues and the fairly small number of participants. Compared to no treatment, passive immunisation seems to be of benefit for preventing rubella. The available evidence suggests that this intervention may be of benefit up to five days after exposure, and that effectiveness is dependent on sufficient dose.
Disclaimer: This summary has been written by staff and volunteers of Evidence Aid in order to make the content of the original document accessible to decision makers who are searching for the available evidence on the health of refugees and asylum seekers but may not have the time, initially, to read the original report in full. This summary is not intended as a substitute for the medical advice of physicians, other health workers, professional associations, guideline developers, or national governments and international agencies. If readers of this summary think that the evidence that is presented within it is relevant to their decision-making they should refer to the content and details of the original article, and the advice and guidelines offered by other sources of expertise, before making decisions. Evidence Aid cannot be held responsible for any decisions made about the health of refugees and asylum seekers on the basis of this summary alone.
If you have found this summary helpful, please consider making a donation. If everyone who looked at our COVID-19 resources gave us just £2 per month, it would fund Evidence Aid’s life-saving work.