Use and safety of azithromycin in neonates: a systematic review

Abstract

Objectives

To identify the use and adverse drug reactions associated with azithromycin in neonates.

Setting

Databases MEDLINE (1948–August 2015), EMBASE (1980–August 2015) and Pubmed (August 2015) were searched for studies on azithromycin in neonates.

Participants

All studies involving neonates (<28 days old) who have received at least a single dose of azithromycin for which safety was evaluated.

Primary and secondary outcome measures

The primary outcome was adverse event (AE) associated with use of azithromycin. Use of azithromycin in neonates was the secondary outcome.

Results

A total of 11 articles involving 473 neonates were identified. 371 AEs were reported. Adverse events were mainly respiratory (358/1000 neonate), neurological (273/1000 neonates) and gastrointestinal (196/1000 neonates) in origin. Azithromycin significantly reduced the risk of bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD) in extremely premature neonates (RR=0.83, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.98, p=0.02). There was no significant difference in the incidence of elevated liver enzymes between the azithromycin and placebo group (p=0.76). There were four cases of infantile hypertrophic pyloric stenosis (IHPS).

Conclusions

Azithromycin significantly reduces the risk of BPD in preterm neonates. The relationship between azithromycin and IHPS requires further investigation.

Correspondence to Dr Oluwaseun Egunsola; [email protected]

Strengths and limitations of this study

• This systematic review assessed the quality of all the randomised controlled trials (RCTs).

• RCTs, cohort studies and case reports were reviewed.

• Only a few studies of azithromycin in neonates have been published.

Introduction

Azithromycin is a macrolide derivative of erythromycin. It is one of the most commonly prescribed antibiotics in children, with a prescription rate of between 4% and 14%.^1–3 Since its approval in the USA and Europe,^{4 5} it has been used extensively for the treatment of several paediatric infectious diseases.⁶ Prescription rate for respiratory tract infection in children is increasing.³

Owing to lack of efficacy and safety studies, oral and intravenous formulations are not recommended for children less than 6 months⁷ and 16 years,⁸ respectively. The safety of azithromycin eye drops in children aged under 1 year is also unknown.^{9 10} Gastrointestinal disorders such as diarrhoea, vomiting and abdominal pain are the most commonly reported side effects in paediatrics.¹¹ Increased risk of arrhythmia and cardiovascular-related death in adults has been reported.^{12 13}

The potential of azithromycin as a chemoprophylactic agent for bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD) in neonates is still under exploration. ureaplasma infection, which has been shown to be susceptible to the drug,^{14 15} is associated with BPD.^{16 17} Despite limited efficacy and safety data, the US Centre for Disease Control (CDC) considers azithromycin as the first choice treatment and chemoprophylaxis of choice for pertussis in neonates. Treatment is recommended for 5–7 days.¹⁸

There is currently insufficient information on azithromycin treatment in neonates; therefore, this systematic review aims to evaluate all published data and reports on the safety and use of the drug in this age group.

Methods

This review was carried out as per PRISMA guidelines. The systematic review protocol was not published.

Search strategy

The databases MEDLINE (1948–August 2015), EMBASE (1980–August 2015) and Pubmed (up to August 2015) were searched. Search words: ‘preterm or neonat* or neonate* or newborn* or infan*’ in title and abstract were combined with ‘azithromycin’ in title and abstract for all databases. Manual search of bibliography was also undertaken.

Eligibility criteria

Any published literature with documented involvement of neonates (birth to 28 days) administered azithromycin via any route of administration for any disease condition was included. There was no restriction on the type of study included, publication date and language of publication or inclusion of abstracts. Any article with involvement of the specified age group taking at least a single dose of azithromycin was assessed. Only articles with information on the safety of azithromycin were included, such as any mention of an adverse drug reaction, drug toxicity, drug, side effects or adverse event.

Data quality assessment

The randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were assessed using Cochrane collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias,¹⁹ by two independent reviewers (figure 1). Studies with low risk of bias in at least four of the six parameters were included in the meta-analysis.

Figure 1. Summary of risk of bias.

Data collection and statistical analysis

A single reviewer undertook eligibility assessment. Each title and available abstract was screened for appropriateness and relevant articles obtained. Articles were examined independently by a second reviewer to confirm they met inclusion criteria. Hand searching of references of articles was performed. Data were extracted from relevant articles on methodology, characteristics of trial participants (including condition and gestational age), number of neonates receiving azithromycin, number of participants in study, route of administration, dose, duration of azithromycin treatment, comparator drugs and adverse events.

Meta-analysis was carried out in Revman V.5.3. Relative risks and 95% CIs were estimated for each RCT. Overall relative risks were calculated from the RCTs. Begg and Mazumdar's rank correlation tests were used to assess publication bias. No significant publication bias was found. Between-studies heterogeneity was assessed using a χ² test where a p value less than 0.05 indicated significant heterogeneity. Fixed effect models were used to produce summary relative risks and 95% CIs where heterogeneity did not exist. If statistical heterogeneity did exist then random effects models were applied.

Results

A total of 11 articles involving 473 neonates were identified (figure 2). The majority of the studies (4 studies) were RCTs. There were three pharmacokinetic studies and three cohort studies (table 1). One case report was identified. The RCTs involved 211 neonates who received azithromycin and 198 controls. The cohort studies and PK studies involved 218 and 43 neonates, respectively. Three hundred and seventy-one AEs were reported. Adverse events were mainly respiratory (358/1000 neonate), neurological (273/1000 neonates) and gastrointestinal (196/1000 neonates) in origin. Vomiting (44/1000 neonates), diarrhoea (15/1000 neonates), abdominal tenderness (22/1000 neonates) and feeding intolerance (37/1000 neonates), were the most frequently reported gastrointestinal symptoms. The majority of the respiratory and neurological AEs were usually associated with prematurity (table 2).

Table 1

Summary of all studies involving term and preterm neonates

ReferenceStudy typeComparatorAge (days)Number of patients AZTNumber of patients controlNumber of AEsAZT doseIndicationCountry

Ballard et al20*	RCT	Placebo	<3	111	109	231	10 mg/kg×1 week then 5 mg/kg/day×5 weeks (IV)	BPD	USA
Ballard et al21*	RCT	Placebo	<3	19	16	39	10 mg/kg×1 week then 5 mg/kg/day×5 weeks (IV)	BPD	USA
Gharehbaghi et al22*	RCT	Nil	<28	56	52	52	10 mg/kg×1week then 5 mg/kg/day×1 week (oral)	BPD	Iran
Dong23	RCT	Erythromycin	<28	25	21	18	10 mg/kg ×3 days (IV) then 4 days without treatment then 10 mg/kg ×3 days (oral)	Chlamydia	China
Friedman et al24	Cohort	–	<28	58	–	13	10–12 mg/kg×5 days (oral)	Pertussis	USA
Hammerschlag et al25	Cohort	–	<28	12	–	0	20 mg/kg single dose and 20 mg/kg/day×3 days (oral)	Chlamydia	USA
Eberly et al26	Cohort	–	<28	148	–	3	NA	–	USA
Viscardi et al27*	Pharmacokinetic	–	<3	13	–	7	20 mg/kg once	Ureaplasma	USA
Hassan et al28*	Pharmacokinetic	–	<28	14	–	10	10 mg/kg once	BPD	USA
Tessema et al29*	Pharmacokinetic	–	<28	16	–	0	10 mg/kg once	–	USA
Zayas et al30*	Case report	–	21	1	–	1	NA	Chlamydia	USA

*Preterm neonates.

AEs, adverse event; AZT, azithromycin; BPD, bronchopulmonary dysplasia; CNS, central nervous system; IVH, intraventricular haemorrhage; IV, intravenous; NA, not applicable; PDA, Patent ductus arteriosus; PVL, periventricular leukomalacia; RCT, randomised controlled trials.

Table 2

Classification and risk of adverse events from RCTs and observational studies (n=324)

ClassificationAdverse eventNumberRisk of AE per 1000 neonates95% CI

Gastrointestinal	Vomiting	12	37	21 to 64
	Feeding intolerance/poor feeding	10	31	16 to 57
	NEC	8	25	12 to 49
	Abdominal tenderness	6	19	8 to 41
	Diarrhoea	4	12	5 to 33
	Other gastrointestinal symptoms	13	40	24 to 68
	Total gastrointestinal AE	53	163	128 to 209
Respiratory	BPD	96	296	251 to 350
	Respiratory distress	1	3	4 to 22
	Total respiratory AE	97	299	253 to 354
CNS	At least grade 3 IVH	29	90	63 to 127
	Abnormal hearing	22	68	45 to 102
	PVL	15	46	28 to 76
	Others	4	12	5 to 33
		74	228	187 to 279
Hepatobiliary	Elevated transaminase	16	49	31 to 80
Cardiovascular	PDA	20	62	40 to 94
Metabolic	Hyperkalaemia	2	6	2 to 25
Others	Sepsis	11	34	19 to 61
	Other infections	96	296	251 to 350
	Allergy	2	6	2 to 25
Total		371

AEs, adverse event; BPD, bronchopulmonary dysplasia; RCT, randomised controlled trials.

Figure 2. Flow chart of included articles.

Evidence from RCTs

Two of the four RCTs were placebo controlled. Intravenous azithromycin, 10 mg/kg/day, was administered for 1 week followed by a 5-week course of 5 mg/kg/day as prophylaxis for BPD in both studies.^{20 21} A third study administered 5 mg/kg/day for 1 week after an initial 1 week course of oral 10 mg/kg/day.²² The patients in the comparator arm of this study were not given any treatment. Meta-analysis of the incidence of BPD between neonates administered azithromycin and the control group in the three studies showed that azithromycin significantly reduced the risk of BPD in extremely premature neonates (RR=0.83, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.98, p=0.02) (figure 3): 55% of preterm neonates given azithromycin developed BPD compared to 67% of those without treatment or those given placebo. Funnel plots of these RCTs show no publication bias (figure 4). The fourth study compared the efficacy of azithromycin with erythromycin for the treatment of chlamydia conjunctivitis.²³ Ninety-six per cent of children treated with 3 days intravenous 10 mg/kg and subsequent 4 days oral dose azithromycin recovered compared with 76% of those given twice daily 10 mg/kg erythromycin for 3 days followed by 11 days of thrice daily oral erythromycin. A significantly higher cure rate (p=0.03) was achieved with azithromycin than with erythromycin.

Figure 3. Relative risks of BPD in azithromycin and untreated/placebo treated preterm neonates. BPD, bronchopulmonary dysplasia.

Figure 4. Funnel plot to determine publication bias.

There was no significant difference in the incidence of elevated liver enzymes between the azithromycin and placebo group (p=0.76) (figure 5). All cases of elevated transaminases (16 cases) were reported in a single RCT.²⁰ There were 13 cases of elevated transaminases in the control group of this study. Only one placebo/no treatment controlled trial reported vomiting as an adverse event, with no significant difference between the azithromycin group and the neonates without treatment (p=0.79). The other AEs reported in the placebo/no treatment controlled RCTs were usually associated with prematurity (intraventricular haemorrhage, periventricular leucomalacia, necrotising enterocolitis, patent ductus arteriosus and hearing abnormalities) and there were no significant differences between azithromycin and the comparator arms.^20–22 A Chinese study reported more cases of diarrhoea, abdominal pain and reduced appetite in the children treated with oral erythromycin (after 3 days of intravenous treatment), compared with those administered azithromycin.²³

Figure 5. Relative risk of elevated transaminase in azithromycin and placebo treated neonates.

Evidence from observational studies

Two cohort studies were identified. One of these studies involved a cohort of neonates given either azithromycin or erythromycin following exposure to a patient with pertussis.²⁴ Fifty-eight neonates received azithromycin while 18 were given erythromycin. None of the neonates developed infantile hypertrophic pyloric stenosis (IHPS). Fourteen (24%) of those given azithromycin experienced AEs. These included three cases each of irritability, candidiasis and vomiting; two cases of rash and one case each of diarrhoea, abdominal pain and blood in the stool. Ten (56%) of the neonates given erythromycin experienced AEs. There was a significantly lower incidence of diarrhoea (p=0.01) in the azithromycin-treated compared with erythromycin-treated neonates. The incidences of other AEs were not significantly different.

The second observational study involved 12 neonates who received varying doses of azithromycin suspension for the treatment of chlamydia conjunctivitis.²⁵ Three of the 5 neonates (60%) administered a single dose of 20 mg/kg became culture negative; while 6 of the 7 (86%) given 20 mg/kg/day for 3 days became culture negative. No AEs were reported in this study.

Retrospective study

A single retrospective cohort study was identified. This study explored the risk of IHPS in neonates exposed to azithromycin and erythromycin, using the US military health system (MHS) database. Of the one hundred and forty-eight neonates (0–14 days old) treated with azithromycin, 3 (2%) developed IHPS. Nine (3%) of the 291 neonates (0–14 days) given erythromycin had IHPS.²⁶

Pharmacokinetic studies

A single dose of 20 mg/kg was administered in a pharmacokinetic study²⁷ and a 10 mg/kg single dose was administered in two other pharmacokinetic studies.^{28 29} All the AEs reported in two of these studies were usually associated with prematurity and none was attributed to azithromycin.^{27 28} There were four cases of intraventricular haemorrhage, three of hearing loss, two of necrotising enterocolitis, one each of periventricular leucomalacia, respiratory distress syndrome, pneumomediastinum and hyperbilirubinaemia. No AEs were observed in the third study.²⁹

Case report

There was one case report of pyloric stenosis in a 5-week old infant who had received 5 days of oral azithromycin at 3 weeks of life as treatment for chlamydia conjunctivitis.³⁰

Discussion

Only a small population of neonates have been treated with azithromycin and no major AE has been documented. This systematic review shows that azithromycin significantly reduces the risk of BPD in neonates and is also effective in the treatment of chlamydia conjunctivitis. A previous systematic review has also demonstrated the efficacy of azithromycin in the prevention of BPD.³¹ Macrolide antibiotics are inhibitors of ureaplasma. The relationship between ureaplasma infection and BPD has been explored with varying outcomes reported from different studies.^{15 17 32} We have also identified two off-label studies demonstrating the efficacy of azithromycin against chlamydia trachomatis in neonates. Previous studies have reported the susceptibility of chlamydia to azithromycin.³³ Azithromycin was administered once daily in all studies because of its long half-life, which is estimated to be between 26 and 83 h in neonates.²⁵ The dose and duration of treatment with azithromycin varied across the studies. This may be due to its off-label use and the absence of a standardised dosing regimen for the drug in this age group. Very few studies have been conducted in neonates; hence the safety and efficacy of different dosing regimens for different indications have not been established.

The majority of the AEs reported in preterm neonates were related to prematurity and were unlikely to be caused by azithromycin. Results from one of the studies, however, showed that azithromycin had a better safety profile than erythromycin in neonates. Diarrhoea, abdominal discomfort and reduced appetite were less frequent in azithromycin treated neonates. In another study, 2% and 3%, respectively, of neonates exposed to azithromycin and erythromycin within 14 days of life developed IHPS.²⁶ Both erythromycin and azithromycin are gastric motilin receptor agonists.³⁴ Activation of these receptors by erythromycin with consequent increased pyloric contractions has been hypothesised as a possible cause of pyloric hypertrophy in neonates.³⁵ The association between erythromycin and pyloric stenosis has been demonstrated in previous studies. High dose and early neonatal exposure to the drug within the first 14 days of life are known risk factors.³⁶ Azithromycin, similarly to erythromycin, binds to and activates the motilin receptors.³⁷ Erythromycin is, however, believed to have a stronger gastrointestinal prokinetic effect than azithromycin.³⁸ These drugs are slightly structurally different, with erythromycin having a 14-C member heterocyclic ring and azithromycin a 15 member ring.³⁹ The effect of the structural differences on motilin receptor binding and IHPS requires further exploration. Postnatal exposure to macrolides from breast milk has also been associated with IHPS.⁴⁰ Further studies are required to determine the relationship between neonatal azithromycin use and IHPS.

Although prolonged QT_c interval and torsades de pointes had been reported in azithromycin-treated adults,⁴¹ none of the reviewed studies evaluated neonates for arrhythmia. There is a documented case of arrhythmia in an infant following azithromycin overdose,⁴² and spiramycin, which is a structurally similar macrolide, has been associated with neonatal arrhythmia.⁴³ Prolonged QT_c interval can be normal in the first few days of life in premature neonates, hence it is difficult to identify drug-induced aetiology during this period.⁴⁴

In conclusion, azithromycin significantly reduces the risk of BPD in preterm neonates and it is effective for the treatment of chlamydia conjunctivitis. It has a better safety profile than erythromycin in the limited number of treated neonates. The relationship between azithromycin and IHPS requires further investigation. More studies are required to determine a safe and effective dose for azithromycin in neonates.

This work is part of the TINN2 network (Collaborative Project) supported by the European Commission under the Health Cooperation Work Programme of the 7th Framework Programme (grant agreement number 260908). The authors wish to thank Sally Hinchcliffe, Medical Statistician at the Royal Derby Hospital, for her statistical advice on this paper.

Footnote

Contributors IC, SK, EJ-A and HS conceived the idea; CS performed the literature search and extracted the data. OE updated the search and verified the extracted data. OE produced the first draft of the manuscript. All the authors contributed to the subsequent and final drafts of the manuscript.

Funding Supported by the European Commission under the Health Cooperation Work Programme of the 7th Framework Programme (grant agreement number 260908).

Competing interests None declared.

Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

Data sharing statement No additional data are available.

References

¹ Clavenna A, Bonati M. Differences in antibiotic prescribing in paediatric outpatients. Arch Dis Child 2011; 96: 590–5. doi:10.1136/adc.2010.183541

² Franchi C, Sequi M, Bonati M, et al. Differences in outpatient antibiotic prescription in Italy's Lombardy region. Infection 2011; 39: 299–308. doi:10.1007/s15010-011-0129-1

³ Grijalva CG, Nuorti JP, Griffin MR. Antibiotic prescription rates for acute respiratory tract infections in US ambulatory settings. JAMA 2009; 302: 758–66. doi:10.1001/jama.2009.1163

⁴ Zuckerman JM. Macrolides and ketolides: azithromycin, clarithromycin, telithromycin. Infect Dis Clin North Am 2004; 18: 621–49. doi:10.1016/j.idc.2004.04.010

⁵ Heads of Medicines Agencies. Azithromycin part II. http://www.hma.eu/fileadmin/dateien/Human_Medicines/CMD_h_/Paediatric_Regulation/Assessment_Reports/Article_45_work-sharing/Azithromycin_II-2012_09-Art.45_PublicAR.pdf (accessed 18 Feb 2014).

⁶ Langtry HD, Balfour JA. Azithromycin. A review of its use in paediatric infectious diseases. Drugs 1998; 56: 273–97. doi:10.2165/00003495-199856020-00014

⁷ Joint Formulary Committee. British National Formulary (online). London: BMJ Group and Pharmaceutical Press. http://www.medicinescomplete.com (accessed 17 Jul 2013).

⁸ Medicine and healthcare products regulatory agency. Azithromycin 500 mg powder for infusion. http://www.mhra.gov.uk (accessed 17 Jul 2013).

⁹ Summary of product characteristics: Azyter 15 mg/g eye drops. http://www.mhra.gov.uk (accessed 19 Jul 2013).

¹⁰ Full prescribing information: AzaSite®. http://www.accessdata.fda.gov (accessed 19 Jul 2013).

¹¹ Ruuskanen O. Safety and tolerability of azithromycin in pediatric infectious diseases: 2003 update. Pediatr Infect Dis J 2004; 23 (2 Suppl): S135–9. doi:10.1097/01.inf.0000112528.75956.41

¹² Ray WA, Murray KT, Hall K, et al. Azithromycin and the risk of cardiovascular death. N Engl J Med. 2012; 366: 1881–90. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1003833

¹³ FDA drug safety communication. Azithromycin (Zithromax or Zmax) and the risk of potentially fatal heart rhythms. http://www.fda.gov (accessed 9 Jul 2013).

¹⁴ Taylor-Robinson D, Bébéar C. Antibiotic susceptibilities of mycoplasmas and treatment of mycoplasmal infections. J Antimicrob Chemother 1997; 40: 622–30. doi:10.1093/jac/40.5.622

¹⁵ Koh E, Kim S, Kim IS, et al. Antimicrobial susceptibilities of Ureaplasma urealyticum and Mycoplasma hominis in pregnant women. Korean J Clin Microbiol 2009; 12: 159–62. doi:10.5145/KJCM.2009.12.4.159

¹⁶ Wang EL, Ohlsson A, Kellner JD. Association of Ureaplasma urealyticum colonization with chronic lung disease of prematurity: results of a metaanalysis. J Pediatr 1995; 127: 640–4. doi:10.1016/S0022-3476(95)70130-3

¹⁷ Schelonka RL, Katz B, Waites KB, et al. Critical appraisal of the role of Ureaplasma in the development of bronchopulmonary dysplasia with metaanalytic techniques. Pediatr Infect Dis J 2005; 24: 1033–9. doi:10.1097/01.inf.0000190632.31565.83

¹⁸ Tiwari T, Murphy TV, Moran J. Recommended antimicrobial agents for the treatment and postexposure prophylaxis of pertussis: 2005 CDC Guidelines. MMWR Recomm Rep 2005; 54 (RR-14): 1–16.

¹⁹ Cochrane bias method group: Assessing risk of bias in included studies. http://bmg.cochrane.org/assessing-risk-bias-included-studies. (accessed 10 Jul 2013).

²⁰ Ballard HO, Shook LA, Bernard P, et al. Use of azithromycin for the prevention of bronchopulmonary dysplasia in preterm infants: a randomised, double-blind, placebo controlled trial. Pediatr Pulmonol 2011; 46: 111–18. doi:10.1002/ppul.21352

²¹ Ballard HO, Anstead MI, Shook LA. Azithromycin in the extremely low birth weight infant for the prevention of bronchopulmonary dysplasia: a pilot study. Respir Res 2007; 8: 41. doi:10.1186/1465-9921-8-41

²² Gharehbaghi MM, Peirovifar A, Ghojazadeh M, et al. Efficacy of azithromycin for prevention of bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD). Turk J Med Sci 2012; 42: 1070–5.

²³ Dong Z. Efficacy of azithromycin in the treatment of Chlamydia trichomatis conjunctivitis in neofant. Chin J Antibiot 2005; 30: 428–9.

²⁴ Friedman DS, Curtis CR, Schauer SL, et al. Surveillance for transmission and antibiotic adverse events among neonates and adults exposed to a healthcare worker with pertussis. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2004; 25: 967–73. doi:10.1086/502328

²⁵ Hammerschlag MR, Gelling M, Roblin PM, et al. Treatment of neonatal chlamydial conjunctivitis with azithromycin. Pediatr Infect Dis J 1998; 17: 1049–50. doi:10.1097/00006454-199811000-00020

²⁶ Eberly MD, Eide MB, Thompson JL, et al. Azithromycin in early infancy and pyloric stenosis. Pediatrics 2015; 135: 483–8. doi:10.1542/peds.2014-2026

²⁷ Viscardi RM, Othman AA, Hassan HE, et al. Azithromycin to prevent bronchopulmonary dysplasia in ureaplasma-infected preterm infants: pharmacokinetics, safety, microbial response, and clinical outcomes with a 20-milligram-per-kilogram single intravenous dose. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2013; 57: 2127–33. doi:10.1128/AAC.02183-12

²⁸ Hassan HE, Othman AA, Eddington ND, et al. Pharmacokinetics, safety, and biological effects of azithromycin in extremely preterm infants at risk for ureaplasma colonization and bronchopulmonary dysplasia. J Clin Pharmacol 2011; 51: 1264–75. doi:10.1177/0091270010382021

²⁹ Tessema E, Warrier I, Lulic-Botica M, et al. Pharmacokinetics (PK) of intravenous azithromycin in preterm newborns. Neonatology 2007; 92: 279–95. doi:10.1159/000107709

³⁰ Zayas J. A 5 week old male presenting with infantile hypertrophic pyloric stenosis following azithromycin therapy: a case report. J Investig Med 2010; 58: 415.

³¹ Nair V, Loganathan P, Soraisham AS. Azithromycin and other macrolides for prevention of bronchopulmonary dysplasia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Neonatology 2014; 106: 337–47. doi:10.1159/000363493

³² Kallapur SG, Kramer BW, Jobe AH. Ureaplasma and BPD. Semin Perinatol 2013; 37: 94–101. doi:10.1053/j.semperi.2013.01.005

³³ Welsh L, Gaydos C, Quinn T. In vitro evaluation of activities of azithromycin, erythromycin, and tetracycline against Chlamydia trachomatis and Chlamydia pneumoniae. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1992; 36: 291–4. doi:10.1128/AAC.36.2.291

³⁴ Peeters T, Matthijs G, Depoortere I, et al. Erythromycin is a motilin receptor agonist. Am J Physiol 1989; 257: G470–4.

³⁵ Cooper WO, Griffin MR, Arbogast P, et al. Very early exposure to erythromycin and infantile hypertrophic pyloric stenosis. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 2002; 156: 647–50. doi:10.1001/archpedi.156.7.647

³⁶ Maheshwai N. Are young infants treated with erythromycin at risk for developing hypertrophic pyloric stenosis? Arch Dis Child 2007; 92: 271–3. doi:10.1136/adc.2006.110007

³⁷ Broad J, Sanger GJ. The antibiotic azithromycin is a motilin receptor agonist in human stomach: comparison with erythromycin. Br J Pharmacol 2013; 168: 1859–67. doi:10.1111/bph.12077

³⁸ Klein JO. History of macrolide use in paediatrics. Pediatr Infect Dis J 1997; 16: 427–31. doi:10.1097/00006454-199704000-00025

³⁹ Zuckerman JM, Qamar F, Bono BR. Review of macrolides (azithromycin, clarithromycin), ketolids (telithromycin) and glycylcyclines (tigecycline). Med Clin North Am 2011; 95: 761–91. doi:10.1016/j.mcna.2011.03.012

⁴⁰ Sørensen HT, Skriver MV, Pedersen L, et al. Risk of infantile hypertrophic pyloric stenosis after maternal postnatal use of macrolides. Scand J Infect Dis 2003; 35: 104–6. doi:10.1080/0036554021000027010

⁴¹ Howard PA. Azithromycin-induced proarrhythmia and cardiovascular death. Ann Pharmacother 2013; 47: 1547–51. doi:10.1177/1060028013504905

⁴² Tilelli JA, Smith KM, Pettignano R. Life-threatening bradyarrhythmia after massive azithromycin overdose. Pharmacotherapy 2006; 26: 147–50. doi:10.1592/phco.2006.26.1.147

⁴³ Stramba-Badiale M, Nador F, Porta N, et al. QT interval prolongation and risk of life-threatening arrhythmias during toxoplasmosis prophylaxis with spiramycin in neonates. Am Heart J 1997; 133: 108–11. doi:10.1016/S0002-8703(97)70255-2

⁴⁴ Ulrich TJ, Ellsworth MA, Carey WA, et al. Heart-rate-corrected QT interval evolution in premature infants during the first week of life. Pediatr Cardiol 2014; 35: 1363–9. doi:10.1007/s00246-014-0937-z