Physiologic Transition During Delayed Cord Clamping With Assisted Ventilation in Preterm Infants
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Importance: Assisted ventilation during delayed cord clamping (DCC) may improve the physiologic transition of extremely preterm infants immediately after birth. Objective: To determine whether assisted ventilation during 120 seconds of DCC was associated with reduced higher-level resuscitative interventions (intubation, chest compressions, or epinephrine administration) compared with DCC for 30 to 60 seconds followed by resuscitation. Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a secondary analysis of the VentFirst randomized clinical trial that was conducted from September 2, 2016, through February 21, 2023, at 12 centers in the US and Canada. Infants born at 23 weeks 0 days' to 28 weeks 6 days' gestational age (GA) were included. Intervention: Infants randomized to the intervention received either positive-pressure ventilation or continuous positive airway pressure from 30 to 120 seconds after birth, followed by umbilical cord clamping. Those randomized to control received 30 to 60 seconds of DCC followed by assisted ventilation. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was the odds of higher-level resuscitative interventions in the delivery room (DR). Intention-to-treat analyses within 2 a priori cohorts (infants breathing well and not breathing well 30 seconds after birth) used the Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel method to estimate the odds ratios (ORs) of intervention vs control. Results: All 570 infants enrolled in the trial were included. Infants had a median (IQR) GA of 26.6 (25.2-27.9) weeks and 273 (47.9%) were female. A total of 271 infants (47.5%) were assessed as not breathing well 30 seconds after birth (150 intervention and 121 control), and 299 (52.5%) were assessed as breathing well 30 seconds after birth (128 intervention and 171 control). In the not-breathing-well cohort, 146 infants (53.9%) were intubated in the DR, 4 received chest compressions (2 intervention and 2 control), and 1 received epinephrine (control). Intubation was less frequent in the intervention group (71 infants [47.3%] vs 75 infants [62.0%]; OR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.30-0.89). When adjusted by GA strata at randomization, infants in the 26 to 28 weeks' GA stratum who were in the intervention group were less likely to be intubated in the DR (18 of 79 infants [22.8%] vs 29 of 60 infants [48.3%]; OR, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.15-0.65). However, there was no difference in intubation rates for infants in the 23 to 25 weeks' GA stratum (53 of 71 infants [74.7%] vs 46 of 61 infants [75.4%]; OR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.44-2.12). Among infants breathing well at 30 seconds, 74 (24.7%) were intubated in the DR, and none received compressions or epinephrine. Intubation rates were similar between intervention and control in the breathing-well cohort. Conclusions and Relevance: While the VentFirst trial did not find a difference in death or intraventricular hemorrhage, this secondary analysis found that assisted ventilation during DCC was associated with less intubation in the DR, primarily among infants born at 26 to 28 weeks' gestation who were not breathing well 30 seconds after birth. Additional studies are needed before implementing assisted ventilation during DCC in clinical practice. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02742454.
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 | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 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 ».