MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401623604 · doi:10.3389/jpps.2024.13206

Safety and efficacy of phosphodiesterase-5 (PDE-5) inhibitors in fetal growth restriction: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis

2024· review· en· W4401623604 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ying Liu, Ella Man-Wai Un, Ying Bai, Man Keong Chan, Luo Xin Zeng, Sut Leng Lei, Junjun Li, Carolina Oi Lam Ung

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Pharmacy & Pharmaceutical Sciences · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPregnancy and preeclampsia studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversidade de Macau
KeywordsMedicineRandomized controlled trialCochrane LibraryOdds ratioMeta-analysisSildenafilMEDLINENecrotizing enterocolitisPregnancyIntrauterine growth restrictionPediatricsInternal medicineObstetricsGestation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Fetal growth restriction (FGR) is associated with a higher risk of perinatal morbidity and mortality, as well as long-term health issues in newborns. Currently, there is no effective medicine for FGR. Phosphodiesterase-5 (PDE-5) inhibitors have been shown in pre-clinical studies to improve FGR. This study aimed to evaluate the latest evidence about the clinical outcomes and safety of PDE-5 inhibitors for the management of FGR. Methods: Eight databases (PubMed, Embase, Medline, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure, Chinese Biomedical Database and WangFang Database) were searched for English and Chinese articles published from the database inception to December 2023. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) reporting the use of PDE-5 inhibitors in FGR were included. The quality of the RCTs was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. Odds ratio and mean difference (MD) (95% confidence intervals) were pooled for meta-analysis. Results: From 253 retrieved publications, 16 studies involving 1,492 pregnant women met the inclusion criteria. Only sildenafil (15 RCTs) and tadalafil (1 RCT) were studied for FGR. Compared with the control group (placebo, no treatment, or other medication therapies), sildenafil increased birth weight, pregnancy prolongation and umbilical artery pulsatility indices. However, it also increased the risk of pulmonary hypertension in newborns, as well as headache and flushing/rash in mothers. There were no significant differences in gestation age, perinatal mortality or major neonatal morbidity, stillbirth, neonate death, infants admitted to neonatal intensive care unit, intraventricular hemorrhage and necrotizing enterocolitis in infants, as well as pregnancy hypertension and gastrointestinal side effects in mothers between the treatment and the control groups. Discussion: Sildenafil was the most investigated PDE-5 inhibitors for FGR. Current evidence suggests that sildenafil can improve birth weight and duration of pregnancy but at the same time increase the risk of neonatal pulmonary hypertension. It remains uncertain whether the benefits of sildenafil in FGR outweigh the risks and further high-quality RCTs are warranted. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=325909

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.029
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.077

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.029
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0230.040
Bibliometrics0.0090.008
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.139
GPT teacher head0.448
Teacher spread0.309 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Pharmacy & Pharmaceutical SciencesSame topicPregnancy and preeclampsia studiesFrench-language works237,207