Delayed cord clamping in preterm twin infants: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

IF 8.7 1区 医学 Q1 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY American journal of obstetrics and gynecology Pub Date : 2024-10-28 DOI:10.1016/j.ajog.2024.10.024
Lily Chartrand, Keith J Barrington, Philippe Dodin, Andréanne Villeneuve
{"title":"Delayed cord clamping in preterm twin infants: a systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Lily Chartrand, Keith J Barrington, Philippe Dodin, Andréanne Villeneuve","doi":"10.1016/j.ajog.2024.10.024","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To compare the effects of delayed cord clamping (DCC) versus early cord clamping (EDD) on all-cause in-hospital mortality and selected morbidities among preterm twin neonates.</p><p><strong>Data sources: </strong>A search of PubMed, Ovid Medline, Embase, Cochrane database, Web of Science and CINAHL was conducted in December 2023 for studies comparing DCC to ICC in preterm twin neonates.</p><p><strong>Study eligibility criteria: </strong>Studies were deemed eligible if they included preterm twin neonates (< 37 weeks of gestation), compared delayed (≥ 30 seconds) vs early (<30 seconds) umbilical cord clamping at delivery and described at least one outcome of interest. Outcomes of interest were mortality, maternal hemorrhage, transfusion, severe interventricular hemorrhage (grade III or IV), bronchopulmonary dysplasia, necrotizing enterocolitis, retinopathy of prematurity (stage IV or receiving treatment) and length of hospital stay.</p><p><strong>Study appraisal and synthesis methods: </strong>Two reviewers independently selected the studies, assessed bias and extracted data. Risk ratio and mean difference with 95% confidence intervals were determined by fixed effects models, heterogeneity by I<sup>2</sup> statistics.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Five studies compared DCC vs ECC in 2075 infants. Meta-analysis showed a significant reduction in mortality [(RR) 0.70 (95% CI 0.53-0.93)], a significant decrease in the risk of red blood cell transfusion [(RR) 0.42 (95% CI 0.28 - 0.64)] as well as a lower risk of retinopathy of prematurity [(RR) 0.50 (95% CI 0.26-0.96)] with DCC in twin population. DCC had no impact on the incidence of intraventricular hemorrhage [(RR) 1.01 (95% CI 0.79, 1.28)], of bronchopulmonary dysplasia [(RR) 0.67 (95% CI 0.36, 1.24)], of necrotizing enterocolitis [(RR) 1.02 (95% CI 0.60, 1.73)]. There was no significant effect on length of hospital stay [-0.10 (-0.20, -0.00)]. None reported maternal hemorrhage.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>DCC may decrease mortality risk in preterm twin infants without affecting major neonatal morbidities. Further evidence is needed to support its safety in preterm twins.</p>","PeriodicalId":7574,"journal":{"name":"American journal of obstetrics and gynecology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":8.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American journal of obstetrics and gynecology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2024.10.024","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To compare the effects of delayed cord clamping (DCC) versus early cord clamping (EDD) on all-cause in-hospital mortality and selected morbidities among preterm twin neonates.

Data sources: A search of PubMed, Ovid Medline, Embase, Cochrane database, Web of Science and CINAHL was conducted in December 2023 for studies comparing DCC to ICC in preterm twin neonates.

Study eligibility criteria: Studies were deemed eligible if they included preterm twin neonates (< 37 weeks of gestation), compared delayed (≥ 30 seconds) vs early (<30 seconds) umbilical cord clamping at delivery and described at least one outcome of interest. Outcomes of interest were mortality, maternal hemorrhage, transfusion, severe interventricular hemorrhage (grade III or IV), bronchopulmonary dysplasia, necrotizing enterocolitis, retinopathy of prematurity (stage IV or receiving treatment) and length of hospital stay.

Study appraisal and synthesis methods: Two reviewers independently selected the studies, assessed bias and extracted data. Risk ratio and mean difference with 95% confidence intervals were determined by fixed effects models, heterogeneity by I2 statistics.

Results: Five studies compared DCC vs ECC in 2075 infants. Meta-analysis showed a significant reduction in mortality [(RR) 0.70 (95% CI 0.53-0.93)], a significant decrease in the risk of red blood cell transfusion [(RR) 0.42 (95% CI 0.28 - 0.64)] as well as a lower risk of retinopathy of prematurity [(RR) 0.50 (95% CI 0.26-0.96)] with DCC in twin population. DCC had no impact on the incidence of intraventricular hemorrhage [(RR) 1.01 (95% CI 0.79, 1.28)], of bronchopulmonary dysplasia [(RR) 0.67 (95% CI 0.36, 1.24)], of necrotizing enterocolitis [(RR) 1.02 (95% CI 0.60, 1.73)]. There was no significant effect on length of hospital stay [-0.10 (-0.20, -0.00)]. None reported maternal hemorrhage.

Conclusion: DCC may decrease mortality risk in preterm twin infants without affecting major neonatal morbidities. Further evidence is needed to support its safety in preterm twins.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
早产双胎婴儿延迟断脐:系统回顾和荟萃分析。
目的:比较延迟脐带夹闭(DCC)和早期脐带夹闭(EDD)对早产双胎新生儿院内全因死亡率和部分发病率的影响:比较延迟脐带夹闭(DCC)与早期脐带夹闭(EDD)对早产双胎新生儿院内全因死亡率和特定发病率的影响:2023年12月,在PubMed、Ovid Medline、Embase、Cochrane数据库、Web of Science和CINAHL中检索了早产双胎新生儿DCC与ICC的比较研究:研究资格标准:纳入早产双胎新生儿(妊娠小于 37 周)、比较延迟(≥ 30 秒)与早期(研究评估和综合方法:两名评审员独立选择研究、评估偏倚并提取数据。通过固定效应模型确定风险比和平均差异及95%置信区间,通过I2统计确定异质性:五项研究比较了2075名婴儿的DCC与ECC。Meta 分析表明,在双胎人群中,DCC 可显著降低死亡率[(RR) 0.70 (95% CI 0.53-0.93)],显著降低输红细胞风险[(RR) 0.42 (95% CI 0.28 - 0.64)],降低早产儿视网膜病变风险[(RR) 0.50 (95% CI 0.26-0.96)]。DCC对脑室内出血[(RR) 1.01 (95% CI 0.79, 1.28)]、支气管肺发育不良[(RR) 0.67 (95% CI 0.36, 1.24)]和坏死性小肠结肠炎[(RR) 1.02 (95% CI 0.60, 1.73)]的发生率没有影响。对住院时间没有明显影响[-0.10(-0.20,-0.00)]。无产妇大出血报告:结论:DCC 可降低早产双胎婴儿的死亡风险,且不会影响新生儿的主要发病率。结论:DCC 可降低早产双胎婴儿的死亡风险,且不会影响新生儿的主要病症,但需要更多证据来证明其对早产双胎婴儿的安全性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
15.90
自引率
7.10%
发文量
2237
审稿时长
47 days
期刊介绍: The American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, known as "The Gray Journal," covers the entire spectrum of Obstetrics and Gynecology. It aims to publish original research (clinical and translational), reviews, opinions, video clips, podcasts, and interviews that contribute to understanding health and disease and have the potential to impact the practice of women's healthcare. Focus Areas: Diagnosis, Treatment, Prediction, and Prevention: The journal focuses on research related to the diagnosis, treatment, prediction, and prevention of obstetrical and gynecological disorders. Biology of Reproduction: AJOG publishes work on the biology of reproduction, including studies on reproductive physiology and mechanisms of obstetrical and gynecological diseases. Content Types: Original Research: Clinical and translational research articles. Reviews: Comprehensive reviews providing insights into various aspects of obstetrics and gynecology. Opinions: Perspectives and opinions on important topics in the field. Multimedia Content: Video clips, podcasts, and interviews. Peer Review Process: All submissions undergo a rigorous peer review process to ensure quality and relevance to the field of obstetrics and gynecology.
期刊最新文献
Cerebral infarcts, edema, hypoperfusion and vasospasm in preeclampsia and eclampsia. Detection of endometrial cancer-related bleeding in virtual visits. Prevalence and risk factors for postpartum depression two months after cesarean delivery: a prospective multicenter study. Association between infertility and cervical insufficiency in nulliparous women- the contribution of fertility treatment. Delayed cord clamping in preterm twin infants: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1