Late erythropoietin for preventing red blood cell transfusion in preterm and/or low birth weight infants
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Low plasma levels of erythropoietin (EPO) in preterm infants provide a rationale for the use of EPO to prevent or treat anaemia. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness and safety of late initiation of EPO (initiated at eight days after birth or later) in reducing the use of red blood cell (RBC) transfusions in preterm and/or low birth weight infants. SEARCH METHODS: For this update MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and The Cochrane Library were searched in March 2012. Additional searches included the Pediatric Academic Societies Annual Meetings from 2000 to 2012 (Abstracts2 View(TM)) and clinical trials registries (clinicaltrials.gov; controlled-trials.com; and who.int/ictrp). SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials of late initiation of EPO treatment (started at ≥ eight days of age) versus placebo or no intervention in preterm (< 37 weeks) and/or low birth weight (< 2500 g) neonates. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Data collection and analyses were performed in accordance with the methods of the Cochrane Neonatal Review Group. MAIN RESULTS: In this 2012 update one new study for inclusion was identified. Twenty-eight studies enrolling 1361 preterm infants in 21 countries were included. Most trials were of small sample size. The meta-analysis showed a significant effect on the use of one or more RBC transfusions [typical risk ratio (RR); 0.66 (95% confidence interval (CI); 0.59 to 0.74); typical risk difference (RD) -0.21 (95% CI; -0.26 to -0.16); typical number needed to benefit (NNTB) of 5 (95% CI 4 to 6) 19 studies, 912 infants]. There was moderate heterogeneity for this outcome [for RR (P < 0.00001; I(2) = 74.0%); for RD (P = 0.0006; I(2) = 58.9%)]. Similar results were obtained in secondary analyses based on different combinations of high/low doses of EPO and iron supplementation. In this update there was no significant reduction in the total volume (mL/kg) of blood transfused per infant [typical MD -1.61mL/kg (95% CI -5.78 to 2.57); 5 studies, 197 infants] There was high heterogeneity for this outcome (P = 0.00001, I(2) = 92%). There was a significant reduction in the number of transfusions per infant (nine studies enrolling 567 infants); [typical MD -0.78 (-0.97 to -0.59)]. Three studies including 331 patients reported on retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) (all stages), with a typical RR 0.79 (95% CI 0.57 to 1.10) and a typical RD of -0.05 (95% CI -0.13 to 0.02). This outcome was not statistically significantly different between the groups. There was no heterogeneity for this outcome for either RR (P = 0.41; I(2) = 0%) or RD (P = 0.43; I(2) = 0%). Two trials enrolling 212 patients reported on severe ROP (stage 3 or greater). The typical RR was 0.83 (95% CI 0.23 to 2.98) and the typical RD was -0.01 (95% CI -0.06 to 0.05); neither were statistically significant. There was no heterogeneity for this outcome for either RR (P = 0.29; I(2) = 9.3%) or RD (P = 0.36; I(2) = 0%).There were no significant differences in other clinical outcomes. Long-term neurodevelopmental outcomes were not reported. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Late administration of EPO reduces the use of one or more RBC transfusions, the number of RBC transfusions per infant but not the total volume of RBCs transfused per infant. Any donor exposure is likely not avoided as most studies included infants who had received RBC transfusions prior to trial entry. Late EPO does not significantly reduce or increase any clinically important adverse outcomes. Further research of the use of late EPO treatment to prevent donor exposure is not indicated. Research efforts should focus on limiting donor exposure during the first few days of life in sick neonates, when RBC requirements are most likely to be required and cannot be prevented by late EPO treatment.
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 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,005 | 0,005 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 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 ».