Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Persistent pulmonary hypertension in neonates (PPHN) is associated with high mortality. Currently, the therapeutic mainstay for PPHN is assisted ventilation and administration of inhaled nitric oxide (iNO). However, nitric oxide is costly and may not be appropriate in resource-poor settings. Approximately 30% of patients fail to respond to iNO. High concentrations of phosphodiesterases in the pulmonary vasculature has led to the use of phosphodiesterase inhibitors such as sildenafil or milrinone. OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy and safety of Sildenafil in the treatment of persistent pulmonary hypertension in neonates. SEARCH STRATEGY: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL databases were searched from their inception until March 2007; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, the Cochrane Library, the reference lists of identified trials, and abstracts of meetings were searched without any language restriction. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized or quasi-randomized controlled trials of Sildenafil compared with placebo or other pulmonary vasodilators, irrespective of dose, route and duration of administration in neonates with PPHN, were included if the trial reported any of the pre-specified outcomes. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: The methodological quality of the trials was assessed regarding how bias at study entry, study intervention and outcomes measurement was minimized. Data on relevant outcomes were extracted and the effect size was estimated and reported as relative risk (RR), risk difference (RD) and weighted mean difference (MD) as appropriate. The I-squared (I(2)) test of heterogeneity was applied. MAIN RESULTS: Two small eligible trials (one full article and one abstract) were identified. The methodological quality of the trial presented in the full article was good. Information provided in the abstract was limited. The total number of enrolled patients in the two studies was 37. Both studies were performed in resource-limited settings where iNO and high frequency ventilation are not available. Both studies reported statistically significant improvement in oxygenation (reduction in oxygenation index) in the Sildenafil group. One study reported what would be, if replicated, a strongly protective effect on mortality (RR 0.17, 95% CI 0.03, 1.09) favoring the Sildenafil group. However, this result needs to be replicated in larger studies. No clinically important side effects were reported. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The safety and effectiveness of sildenafil in the treatment of PPHN has not yet been established and its use should be restricted within the context of randomized controlled trials. Further randomized controlled trials of adequate power comparing Sildenafil with other pulmonary vasodilators are needed in moderately ill infants with PPHN.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,005 | 0,017 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,004 | 0,003 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,003 | 0,003 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,007 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».