| Literature DB >> 30161139 |
Nobuhiko Nagano1, Makoto Saito2, Takahiro Sugiura3, Fumiko Miyahara4, Fumihiko Namba5, Erika Ota6.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Optimum timing of umbilical cord clamping has not been established in preterm infants.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30161139 PMCID: PMC6116944 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0201528
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Fig 1Characteristic of included studies (randomized controlled trials).
Fig 2Flow diagram of search results and study selection.
Fig 3Risk of bias in the included studies.
Summary of findings.
| Umbilical cord milking versus delayed cord clamping of preterm infants | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Population: Preterm infants | ||||||
| Outcomes | Relative effect | № of participants | Quality of the evidence | Comments | ||
| NICU mortality (ie, mortality until discharge) | 91 per 1,000 | 212 | ⨁⨁◯◯ | |||
| Initial hematocrit | The mean initial hematocrit in the intervention group was 1.0 higher (2.9 lower to 4.9 higher) | - | 58 | ⨁⨁◯◯ | ||
| Need for transfusion | 509 per 1,000 | 212 | ⨁⨁◯◯ | |||
| Any IVH | 146 per 1,000 | 255 | ⨁⨁◯◯ | |||
| Hb level at birth | The mean birth Hb in the intervention group was 0.43 higher (0.1 lower to 0.96 higher) | - | 255 | ⨁⨁◯◯ | ||
| Maximum serum bilirubin | The mean maximum serum bilirubin in the intervention group was 0.53 higher (0.17 lower to 1.22 higher) | - | 212 | ⨁⨁◯◯ | ||
| Developmental quotient of 2 y | 841 per 1,000 | 174 | ⨁⨁◯◯ | |||
*The risk in the intervention group (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI).
CI: Confidence interval; RR: Risk ratio; MD: Mean difference
GRADE Working Group graades of evidence
High quality: We are very confident that the true effect lies close to that of the estimate of the effect
Moderate quality: We are moderately confident in the effect estimate: The true effect is likely to be close to the estimate of the effect, but there is a possibility that it is substantially different
Low quality: Our confidence in the effect estimate is limited: The true effect may be substantially different from the estimate of the effect
Very low quality: We have very little confidence in the effect estimate: The true effect is likely to be substantially different from the estimate of effect
Explanations
a. Optimal sample size not met (imprecision -1).
b. Wide 95%CI (imprecision -1).
c. One study with small sample size (imprecision -1).
d. Risk of bias is high risk (risk of bias -1).
Fig 4Comparison of umbilical cord milking and delayed cord clamping.
(A) Outcome 1: neonatal intensive care unit mortality. (B) Outcome 3: Need for transfusion. (C) Outcome 4: Hb level at birth. (D) Outcome 5: Maximum serum bilirubin. (E) Outcome 6: IVH. (F) Outcome 7: Development quotient using Bailey Ⅲ Cognitive scores at 2 years of age ≧85. (G) Outcome 7: Development quotient using Bailey Ⅲ Language scores at 2 years of age ≧85. (H) Outcome 7: Development quotient using Bailey Ⅲ Motor scores at 2 years of age ≧85. (I) Outcome 12: Necrotizing enterocolitis. (J) Outcome 13: Oxygen dependency at 36 weeks. (K) Outcome 14: Sepsis. (L) Outcome 16: Spontaneous intestinal perforation. UCM: umbilical cord milking; DCC: delayed cord clamping; SD: standard deviation; CI: confidence interval.