MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4240587401 · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd003214

Bronchodilators for the prevention and treatment of chronic lung disease in preterm infants

2001· review· en· W4240587401 sur OpenAlexaff
Geraldine Ng, Orlando da Silva, Arne Ohlsson

Notice bibliographique

RevueCochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2001
Typereview
Langueen
Domaine
Thématique
Établissements canadiensUniversity of TorontoWestern University
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedicineBronchodilatorBronchopulmonary dysplasiaFenoterolChronic bronchitisIpratropium bromidePediatricsAnesthesiaIntensive care medicineInternal medicineAsthmaGestational agePregnancy

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Chronic lung disease (CLD) occurs frequently in preterm infants (< 37 weeks gestational age) and has a multifactorial etiology. Bronchodilators have the potential effect of dilating small airways with muscle hypertrophy. Increase in compliance and tidal volume and decrease in pulmonary resistance have been documented with use of bronchodilators in short term studies of pulmonary mechanics in infants with CLD. Therefore it is possible that bronchodilators might have a role in the prevention and treatment of CLD. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effect of bronchodilators, given prophylactically or as treatment for chronic lung disease, on mortality and other complications of preterm births. SEARCH STRATEGY: The search strategy used to identify studies was according to the guidelines of the Cochrane Neonatal Review Group. Searches were made of MEDLINE 1966 to December 2000, EMBASE 1980 to January 2001, CINAHL 1982 to December 2000, the Cochrane Library Issue 1, 2001, personal files and reference lists of identified trials. The following terms were used: bronchopulmonary dysplasia, chronic lung disease, bronchodilator agents, adrenergic agents, anticholinergic agents, albuterol, aminophylline, atropine, caffeine, clenbuterol, cromakalim, ephedrine, epinephrine, fenoterol, hexoprenaline, ipratropium, isoetharine, isoproterenol, orciprenaline, procaterol, terbutaline, theophylline, tretoquinol. LIMITS: newborn, infant; human, clinical trial or controlled clinical trial, meta analysis, multicenter study or randomised controlled trial. No language restrictions were applied. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled clinical trials involving preterm infants. Initiation of bronchodilator therapy had to occur within two weeks of birth for prevention of CLD. For treatment of CLD treatment should have been initiated before discharge from the neonatal unit. The intervention had to include the randomised administration of a bronchodilator either by nebulisation, metered dose inhaler with or without a spacer device, intravenously or orally, versus placebo or no intervention. Eligible studies had to include at least one of the following outcomes: mortality, CLD at 28 days or at 36 weeks corrected GA, number of days on oxygen, number of days on ventilator, patent ductus arteriosus (PDA), pulmonary interstitial emphysema (PIE), pneumothorax, any grade of intraventricular haemorrhage, necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC), sepsis and adverse effects of bronchodilators. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used the standard method for the Cochrane Collaboration as described in the Cochrane Collaboration handbook. Two investigators (GN, AO) extracted and assessed all data for each study. Any disagreement was resolved by discussion. Relative risk (RR) and risk difference (RD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) are reported for dichotomous outcomes and mean difference (WMD) for continuous data. MAIN RESULTS: One eligible study was found dealing with prevention of CLD; this study used salbutamol and enrolled 173 infants. No eligible studies were found dealing with treatment of CLD. Prophylaxis with salbutamol did not show a statistically significant difference in mortality [RR 1.08 (95% CI 0.50, 2.31); RD 0.01 (95% CI -0.09, 0.11)], CLD (mild, moderate or severe) [RR 1.03 (95% CI 0.78, 1.37); RD 0.02 (95% CI -0.13, 0.17)], need for iv dexamethasone [RR 0.77 (95% CI 0.49, 1.19); RD -0.08 (95% CI -0.22, 0.05)], respiratory infections [RR 0.61 (95% CI 0.27, 1.39); RD -0.06 (95% CI -0.16, 0.04)] or positive blood culture [RR 1.06 (95% CI 0.54, 2.06); RD 0.01 (95% CI -0.10, 0.12)]. There was no statistically significant difference in duration of ventilatory support [MD -1.63 days (95% CI -5.63, 2.37)], duration of oxygen supply [MD -2.82 days (95% CI -11.91, 6.27)] or age of weaning from respiratory support (defined as assisted ventilation or oxygen supplementation) [MD -2.87 days (95% CI -11.28, 5.54)]. No side effects due to salbutamol were commented on in this study. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: There are insufficient data to reliably assess the use of salbutamol for the prevention of CLD. Further clinical trials are necessary to assess the role of salbutamol or other bronchodilator agents in prophylaxis or treatment of CLD.

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 distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,005
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMéta-épidémiologie (sens strict)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Revue systématique · Signal consensuel: Revue systématique
GenreSignal candidat: Synthèse · Signal consensuel: Synthèse
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,111
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0050,002
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0100,002
Bibliométrie0,0000,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0010,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

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.

Tête enseignante Opus0,111
Tête enseignante GPT0,407
Écart entre enseignants0,296 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_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 découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeRevue systématique
Domainenon disponible
GenreSynthèse

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations54
Publié2001
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueCochrane Database of Systematic ReviewsTravaux en français237 207