Cochrane Review: Continuous heparin infusion to prevent thrombosis and catheter occlusion in neonates with peripherally placed percutaneous central venous catheters
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Background Complications associated with peripherally placed percutaneous central venous catheters (PCVC) in neonates include mechanical complications (catheter thrombosis, occlusion or dislodgement) and infection. Strategies to prevent catheter thrombosis and occlusion include the use of heparin. However, heparin is known to be associated with complications such as bleeding and thrombocytopenia. Objectives Primary objective: To assess the effectiveness of heparin for prevention of catheter related thrombosis. Secondary objectives: To assess the effectiveness of heparin on catheter occlusion, duration of catheter patency, catheter related sepsis and complications associated with the use of heparin. Search strategy A literature search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL from their inception to December 2007, The Cochrane Library (Issue 4, 2007) and abstracts from the annual meetings of the Pediatric Academic Societies was performed without language restrictions. Selection criteria Randomized or quasi‐randomized clinical trials of neonates where heparin infusion was compared to placebo or no treatment for prevention of any of the complications related to peripherally placed PCVC were included. Data collection and analysis The methodological quality of included trials was assessed using criteria for masking of randomization, masking of intervention, completeness of follow‐up and masking of outcome measurement. Data on relevant outcomes were extracted and the effect size was estimated by calculating relative risk (RR), risk difference (RD) and associated 95% confidence intervals (CI). Main results Three randomized trials were identified. Two trials of adequate methodology met the eligibility criteria. These studies included 267 neonates. There was reduced risk of catheter occlusion (typical RR 0.28, 95% CI 0.15, 0.53, NNT 5, 95% CI 3, 8). There was no statistically significant difference in the duration of catheter patency when analyzed as continuous data; however, in one study survival analyses identified benefit with heparin (adjusted hazard ratio 0.55, 95% CI 0.36, 83); (Shah 2007). This could be due to higher incidence of elective removal of catheters in neonates at the completion of therapy in the heparin group (63% vs. 42%; p = 0.002) (Shah 2007). There was no statistically significant differences in the risk of thrombosis (typical RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.58, 1.51), catheter related sepsis (typical RR 1.96, 95% CI 0.50, 7.60), or extension of intraventricular hemorrhage (typical RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.25, 3.03) between the two groups. Authors' conclusions Implications for practice: Prophylactic use of heparin for peripherally placed PCVC allows a greater number of infants to complete their intended use (complete therapy) by reducing occlusion. Evidence from this systematic review support the prophylactic use of heparin for PCVC in neonates at a dose of 0.5 IU/kg/hr. Implications for research: None of these studies was powered to evaluate a lower incidence rate of adverse events. If this therapy is adopted in routine practice, monitoring of side effects is indicated. Plain Language Summary Continuous heparin infusion to prevent thrombosis and catheter occlusion in neonates with peripherally placed percutaneous central venous catheters There is now evidence to show the effect of heparin for preventing complications when used with central catheters to give access to the tiny veins of premature and critically ill babies Critically ill or premature babies (born before 37 weeks of pregnancy) often need medication and feeding through their veins. These veins are small and fragile so repeated injections can be hard and painful for the baby. A central catheter is a small tube that can be inserted into the vein, allowing medications and other liquids to be given to the baby for a prolonged period. It can get dislodged, blocked or infected. The drug heparin allows to complete intended therapy in more patients without increasing complications of bleeding or allergic reactions. The review found that there was now evidence to show benefit of heparin. If it is used routinely, careful monitoring of side effects is warranted.
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 enseignantsNi 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.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,004 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,003 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,003 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 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 tête enseignante, 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 ».