足月婴儿脐带夹紧时间对母婴结局的影响

Susan J McDonald, Philippa Middleton, Therese Dowswell, Peter S Morris
{"title":"足月婴儿脐带夹紧时间对母婴结局的影响","authors":"Susan J McDonald,&nbsp;Philippa Middleton,&nbsp;Therese Dowswell,&nbsp;Peter S Morris","doi":"10.1002/ebch.1971","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Policies for timing of cord clamping vary, with early cord clamping generally carried out in the first 60 seconds after birth, whereas later cord clamping usually involves clamping the umbilical cord more than one minute after the birth or when cord pulsation has ceased. The benefits and potential harms of each policy are debated.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objectives</h3>\n \n <p>To determine the effects of early cord clamping compared with late cord clamping after birth on maternal and neonatal outcomes</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Search methods</h3>\n \n <p>We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (13 February 2013).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Selection criteria</h3>\n \n <p>Randomised controlled trials comparing early and late cord clamping.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Data collection and analysis</h3>\n \n <p>Two review authors independently assessed trial eligibility and quality and extracted data.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Main results</h3>\n \n <p>We included 15 trials involving a total of 3911 women and infant pairs. We judged the trials to have an overall moderate risk of bias.</p>\n \n <p><b>Maternal outcomes</b>: No studies in this review reported on maternal death or on severe maternal morbidity. There were no significant differences between early versus late cord clamping groups for the primary outcome of severe postpartum haemorrhage (risk ratio (RR) 1.04, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.65 to 1.65; five trials with data for 2066 women with a late clamping event rate (LCER) of ˜3.5%, I<sup>2</sup> 0%) or for postpartum haemorrhage of 500 mL or more (RR 1.17 95% CI 0.94 to 1.44; five trials, 2260 women with a LCER of ˜12%, I<sup>2</sup> 0%). There were no significant differences between subgroups depending on the use of uterotonic drugs. Mean blood loss was reported in only two trials with data for 1345 women, with no significant differences seen between groups; or for maternal haemoglobin values (mean difference (MD) -0.12 g/dL; 95% CI -0.30 to 0.06, I<sup>2</sup> 0%) at 24 to 72 hours after the birth in three trials.</p>\n \n <p><b>Neonatal outcomes</b>: There were no significant differences between early and late clamping for the primary outcome of neonatal mortality (RR 0.37, 95% CI 0.04 to 3.41, two trials, 381 infants with a LCER of ˜1%), or for most other neonatal morbidity outcomes, such as Apgar score less than seven at five minutes or admission to the special care nursery or neonatal intensive care unit. Mean birthweight was significantly higher in the late, compared with early, cord clamping (101 g increase 95% CI 45 to 157, random-effects model, 12 trials, 3139 infants, I<sup>2</sup> 62%). Fewer infants in the early cord clamping group required phototherapy for jaundice than in the late cord clamping group (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.96, data from seven trials, 2324 infants with a LCER of 4.36%, I<sup>2</sup> 0%). Haemoglobin concentration in infants at 24 to 48 hours was significantly lower in the early cord clamping group (MD -1.49 g/dL, 95% CI -1.78 to -1.21; 884 infants, I<sup>2</sup> 59%). This difference in haemoglobin concentration was not seen at subsequent assessments. However, improvement in iron stores appeared to persist, with infants in the early cord clamping over twice as likely to be iron deficient at three to six months compared with infants whose cord clamping was delayed (RR 2.65 95% CI 1.04 to 6.73, five trials, 1152 infants, I<sup>2</sup> 82%). In the only trial to report longer-term neurodevelopmental outcomes so far, no overall differences between early and late clamping were seen for Ages and Stages Questionnaire scores.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Authors' conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>A more liberal approach to delaying clamping of the umbilical cord in healthy term infants appears to be warranted, particularly in light of growing evidence that delayed cord clamping increases early haemoglobin concentrations and iron stores in infants. Delayed cord clamping is likely to be beneficial as long as access to treatment for jaundice requiring phototherapy is available.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Plain Language Summary</h3>\n \n <p><b>Effect of timing of umbilical cord clamping of term infants on mother and baby outcomes</b></p>\n \n <p>At the time of birth, the infant is still attached to the mother via the umbilical cord, which is part of the placenta. The infant is usually separated from the placenta by clamping the cord. This clamping is one part of the third stage of labour (the time from birth of the baby until delivery of the placenta) and the timing can vary according to clinical policy and practice. Although early cord clamping has been thought to reduce the risk of bleeding after birth (postpartum haemorrhage), this review of 15 randomised trials involving a total of 3911 women and infant pairs showed no significant difference in postpartum haemorrhage rates when early and late cord clamping (generally between one and three minutes) were compared. There were, however, some potentially important advantages of delayed cord clamping in healthy term infants, such as higher birthweight, early haemoglobin concentration, and increased iron reserves up to six months after birth. These need to be balanced against a small additional risk of jaundice in newborns that requires phototherapy.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":12162,"journal":{"name":"Evidence-based child health : a Cochrane review journal","volume":"9 2","pages":"303-397"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-06-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1002/ebch.1971","citationCount":"491","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Effect of timing of umbilical cord clamping of term infants on maternal and neonatal outcomes\",\"authors\":\"Susan J McDonald,&nbsp;Philippa Middleton,&nbsp;Therese Dowswell,&nbsp;Peter S Morris\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/ebch.1971\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Background</h3>\\n \\n <p>Policies for timing of cord clamping vary, with early cord clamping generally carried out in the first 60 seconds after birth, whereas later cord clamping usually involves clamping the umbilical cord more than one minute after the birth or when cord pulsation has ceased. The benefits and potential harms of each policy are debated.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Objectives</h3>\\n \\n <p>To determine the effects of early cord clamping compared with late cord clamping after birth on maternal and neonatal outcomes</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Search methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (13 February 2013).</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Selection criteria</h3>\\n \\n <p>Randomised controlled trials comparing early and late cord clamping.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Data collection and analysis</h3>\\n \\n <p>Two review authors independently assessed trial eligibility and quality and extracted data.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Main results</h3>\\n \\n <p>We included 15 trials involving a total of 3911 women and infant pairs. We judged the trials to have an overall moderate risk of bias.</p>\\n \\n <p><b>Maternal outcomes</b>: No studies in this review reported on maternal death or on severe maternal morbidity. There were no significant differences between early versus late cord clamping groups for the primary outcome of severe postpartum haemorrhage (risk ratio (RR) 1.04, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.65 to 1.65; five trials with data for 2066 women with a late clamping event rate (LCER) of ˜3.5%, I<sup>2</sup> 0%) or for postpartum haemorrhage of 500 mL or more (RR 1.17 95% CI 0.94 to 1.44; five trials, 2260 women with a LCER of ˜12%, I<sup>2</sup> 0%). There were no significant differences between subgroups depending on the use of uterotonic drugs. Mean blood loss was reported in only two trials with data for 1345 women, with no significant differences seen between groups; or for maternal haemoglobin values (mean difference (MD) -0.12 g/dL; 95% CI -0.30 to 0.06, I<sup>2</sup> 0%) at 24 to 72 hours after the birth in three trials.</p>\\n \\n <p><b>Neonatal outcomes</b>: There were no significant differences between early and late clamping for the primary outcome of neonatal mortality (RR 0.37, 95% CI 0.04 to 3.41, two trials, 381 infants with a LCER of ˜1%), or for most other neonatal morbidity outcomes, such as Apgar score less than seven at five minutes or admission to the special care nursery or neonatal intensive care unit. Mean birthweight was significantly higher in the late, compared with early, cord clamping (101 g increase 95% CI 45 to 157, random-effects model, 12 trials, 3139 infants, I<sup>2</sup> 62%). Fewer infants in the early cord clamping group required phototherapy for jaundice than in the late cord clamping group (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.96, data from seven trials, 2324 infants with a LCER of 4.36%, I<sup>2</sup> 0%). Haemoglobin concentration in infants at 24 to 48 hours was significantly lower in the early cord clamping group (MD -1.49 g/dL, 95% CI -1.78 to -1.21; 884 infants, I<sup>2</sup> 59%). This difference in haemoglobin concentration was not seen at subsequent assessments. However, improvement in iron stores appeared to persist, with infants in the early cord clamping over twice as likely to be iron deficient at three to six months compared with infants whose cord clamping was delayed (RR 2.65 95% CI 1.04 to 6.73, five trials, 1152 infants, I<sup>2</sup> 82%). In the only trial to report longer-term neurodevelopmental outcomes so far, no overall differences between early and late clamping were seen for Ages and Stages Questionnaire scores.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Authors' conclusions</h3>\\n \\n <p>A more liberal approach to delaying clamping of the umbilical cord in healthy term infants appears to be warranted, particularly in light of growing evidence that delayed cord clamping increases early haemoglobin concentrations and iron stores in infants. Delayed cord clamping is likely to be beneficial as long as access to treatment for jaundice requiring phototherapy is available.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Plain Language Summary</h3>\\n \\n <p><b>Effect of timing of umbilical cord clamping of term infants on mother and baby outcomes</b></p>\\n \\n <p>At the time of birth, the infant is still attached to the mother via the umbilical cord, which is part of the placenta. The infant is usually separated from the placenta by clamping the cord. This clamping is one part of the third stage of labour (the time from birth of the baby until delivery of the placenta) and the timing can vary according to clinical policy and practice. Although early cord clamping has been thought to reduce the risk of bleeding after birth (postpartum haemorrhage), this review of 15 randomised trials involving a total of 3911 women and infant pairs showed no significant difference in postpartum haemorrhage rates when early and late cord clamping (generally between one and three minutes) were compared. There were, however, some potentially important advantages of delayed cord clamping in healthy term infants, such as higher birthweight, early haemoglobin concentration, and increased iron reserves up to six months after birth. These need to be balanced against a small additional risk of jaundice in newborns that requires phototherapy.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12162,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Evidence-based child health : a Cochrane review journal\",\"volume\":\"9 2\",\"pages\":\"303-397\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2014-06-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1002/ebch.1971\",\"citationCount\":\"491\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Evidence-based child health : a Cochrane review journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ebch.1971\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Evidence-based child health : a Cochrane review journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ebch.1971","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 491

摘要

脐带夹紧时间的政策各不相同,早期脐带夹紧通常在出生后的前60秒进行,而后期脐带夹紧通常在出生后一分钟多或脐带脉动停止时进行。每项政策的好处和潜在危害都是有争议的。目的比较出生后早期脐带夹紧与晚期脐带夹紧对孕产妇和新生儿结局的影响。检索方法我们检索了Cochrane妊娠与分娩组的试验登记(2013年2月13日)。选择标准:比较早期和晚期脐带夹紧的随机对照试验。资料收集和分析两位综述作者独立评估试验资格和质量并提取资料。我们纳入了15项试验,共涉及3911对妇女和婴儿。我们判断这些试验总体偏倚风险为中等。产妇结局:本综述中没有关于产妇死亡或严重产妇发病率的研究报告。早期和晚期脐带夹紧组在严重产后出血的主要结局上无显著差异(风险比(RR) 1.04, 95%可信区间(CI) 0.65 ~ 1.65;5项试验的数据为2066名妇女,晚期夹持事件率(LCER)约3.5%,i2%)或产后出血500 mL或更多(RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.94至1.44;5项试验,2260名LCER为~ 12%,i20 %的女性)。不同亚组间子宫强直药物使用差异无统计学意义。平均失血量仅在两项涉及1345名女性的试验中报告,两组间无显著差异;或母体血红蛋白值(平均差(MD) -0.12 g/dL;95% CI -0.30 ~ 0.06, i2%),在出生后24 ~ 72小时。新生儿结局:在新生儿死亡率的主要结局(RR 0.37, 95% CI 0.04 - 3.41,两项试验,381名LCER为1%的婴儿)或大多数其他新生儿发病率结局(如5分钟时Apgar评分低于7分或进入特殊护理托儿所或新生儿重症监护病房)方面,早期和晚期夹钳无显著差异。平均出生体重在脐带夹紧后期明显高于早期(101 g增加95% CI 45 - 157,随机效应模型,12项试验,3139名婴儿,I2 62%)。早期脐带夹断组需要光疗黄疸的婴儿少于晚期脐带夹断组(RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.41至0.96,数据来自7项试验,2324名婴儿,LCER为4.36%,i2%)。早期脐带夹住组婴儿24 ~ 48小时血红蛋白浓度显著降低(MD -1.49 g/dL, 95% CI -1.78 ~ -1.21;婴儿884例,占2 59%)。在随后的评估中未见血红蛋白浓度的差异。然而,铁储量的改善似乎持续存在,与脐带夹紧延迟的婴儿相比,早期脐带夹紧的婴儿在3至6个月时缺铁的可能性是延迟脐带夹紧的婴儿的两倍多(RR 2.65 95% CI 1.04至6.73,5项试验,1152名婴儿,I2 82%)。在迄今为止唯一一项报告长期神经发育结果的试验中,年龄和阶段问卷得分在早期和晚期夹钳之间没有总体差异。在健康足月婴儿中,延迟脐带夹紧的更自由的方法似乎是合理的,特别是考虑到越来越多的证据表明,延迟脐带夹紧会增加婴儿早期血红蛋白浓度和铁储量。延迟脐带夹紧可能是有益的,只要获得治疗黄疸需要光疗是可用的。足月婴儿脐带夹紧时机对母婴结局的影响在出生时,婴儿仍然通过脐带与母亲相连,脐带是胎盘的一部分。婴儿通常通过夹住脐带与胎盘分离。夹钳是分娩第三阶段(从婴儿出生到胎盘娩出)的一部分,时间根据临床政策和实践而有所不同。 虽然早期脐带夹紧被认为可以降低产后出血(产后出血)的风险,但这篇对15项随机试验的综述共涉及3911名妇女和婴儿对,结果显示,在早期和晚期脐带夹紧(通常在1到3分钟之间)进行比较时,产后出血率没有显著差异。然而,延迟脐带夹紧对健康足月婴儿有一些潜在的重要优势,如出生体重较高,血红蛋白浓度较早,出生后6个月铁储备增加。这些需要与需要光疗的新生儿黄疸的小额外风险相平衡。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Effect of timing of umbilical cord clamping of term infants on maternal and neonatal outcomes

Background

Policies for timing of cord clamping vary, with early cord clamping generally carried out in the first 60 seconds after birth, whereas later cord clamping usually involves clamping the umbilical cord more than one minute after the birth or when cord pulsation has ceased. The benefits and potential harms of each policy are debated.

Objectives

To determine the effects of early cord clamping compared with late cord clamping after birth on maternal and neonatal outcomes

Search methods

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (13 February 2013).

Selection criteria

Randomised controlled trials comparing early and late cord clamping.

Data collection and analysis

Two review authors independently assessed trial eligibility and quality and extracted data.

Main results

We included 15 trials involving a total of 3911 women and infant pairs. We judged the trials to have an overall moderate risk of bias.

Maternal outcomes: No studies in this review reported on maternal death or on severe maternal morbidity. There were no significant differences between early versus late cord clamping groups for the primary outcome of severe postpartum haemorrhage (risk ratio (RR) 1.04, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.65 to 1.65; five trials with data for 2066 women with a late clamping event rate (LCER) of ˜3.5%, I2 0%) or for postpartum haemorrhage of 500 mL or more (RR 1.17 95% CI 0.94 to 1.44; five trials, 2260 women with a LCER of ˜12%, I2 0%). There were no significant differences between subgroups depending on the use of uterotonic drugs. Mean blood loss was reported in only two trials with data for 1345 women, with no significant differences seen between groups; or for maternal haemoglobin values (mean difference (MD) -0.12 g/dL; 95% CI -0.30 to 0.06, I2 0%) at 24 to 72 hours after the birth in three trials.

Neonatal outcomes: There were no significant differences between early and late clamping for the primary outcome of neonatal mortality (RR 0.37, 95% CI 0.04 to 3.41, two trials, 381 infants with a LCER of ˜1%), or for most other neonatal morbidity outcomes, such as Apgar score less than seven at five minutes or admission to the special care nursery or neonatal intensive care unit. Mean birthweight was significantly higher in the late, compared with early, cord clamping (101 g increase 95% CI 45 to 157, random-effects model, 12 trials, 3139 infants, I2 62%). Fewer infants in the early cord clamping group required phototherapy for jaundice than in the late cord clamping group (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.96, data from seven trials, 2324 infants with a LCER of 4.36%, I2 0%). Haemoglobin concentration in infants at 24 to 48 hours was significantly lower in the early cord clamping group (MD -1.49 g/dL, 95% CI -1.78 to -1.21; 884 infants, I2 59%). This difference in haemoglobin concentration was not seen at subsequent assessments. However, improvement in iron stores appeared to persist, with infants in the early cord clamping over twice as likely to be iron deficient at three to six months compared with infants whose cord clamping was delayed (RR 2.65 95% CI 1.04 to 6.73, five trials, 1152 infants, I2 82%). In the only trial to report longer-term neurodevelopmental outcomes so far, no overall differences between early and late clamping were seen for Ages and Stages Questionnaire scores.

Authors' conclusions

A more liberal approach to delaying clamping of the umbilical cord in healthy term infants appears to be warranted, particularly in light of growing evidence that delayed cord clamping increases early haemoglobin concentrations and iron stores in infants. Delayed cord clamping is likely to be beneficial as long as access to treatment for jaundice requiring phototherapy is available.

Plain Language Summary

Effect of timing of umbilical cord clamping of term infants on mother and baby outcomes

At the time of birth, the infant is still attached to the mother via the umbilical cord, which is part of the placenta. The infant is usually separated from the placenta by clamping the cord. This clamping is one part of the third stage of labour (the time from birth of the baby until delivery of the placenta) and the timing can vary according to clinical policy and practice. Although early cord clamping has been thought to reduce the risk of bleeding after birth (postpartum haemorrhage), this review of 15 randomised trials involving a total of 3911 women and infant pairs showed no significant difference in postpartum haemorrhage rates when early and late cord clamping (generally between one and three minutes) were compared. There were, however, some potentially important advantages of delayed cord clamping in healthy term infants, such as higher birthweight, early haemoglobin concentration, and increased iron reserves up to six months after birth. These need to be balanced against a small additional risk of jaundice in newborns that requires phototherapy.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Issue Information A meta-epidemiological study to examine the association between bias and treatment effects in neonatal trials Pros and cons … Formoterol or salmeterol for asthma—should they be used as monotherapy? Interventions for treating femoral shaft fractures in children and adolescents
×
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