Pediatric pulmonology · 2026
Investigations for Bronchiolitis in Infants: An Overview of Reviews and Systematic Review of Primary Studies.
СтатьяСистематический обзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Loveys Kate, Borland Meredith L, Oakley Ed, Babl Franz E, Cotterell Elizabeth, Harrison Georgia, Haskell Libby, O'Brien Sharon, Tavender Emma J, Wilson Catherine L, Dalziel Stuart R, Paediatric Research in Emergency Departments International Collaborative (PREDICT) network
Аннотация
AIM: To synthesize evidence on the clinical utility of chest X-ray (CXR), laboratory and viral testing in infants with bronchiolitis, including in subgroups with unexpected deterioration or intensive care unit (ICU) admission (severe disease).
METHODS: An overview of reviews and systematic review of primary studies were conducted. MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed, Cochrane Library, CINAHL were searched (2000 to 19/02/25) for systematic reviews and primary studies evaluating investigations in bronchiolitis management at hospital. Risk of bias (ROBIS, NOS) and certainty of evidence (GRADE) were evaluated. Results were narratively synthesized.
RESULTS: Thirty/28,602 publications were included (N = 23,605 infants, N = 59 studies; three systematic reviews [32 studies], 27 observational studies). In typical bronchiolitis: (1) CXR demonstrated insufficient diagnostic accuracy, increased antibiotic prescriptions, and was not associated with ICU length of stay (LOS) (very low quality of evidence); (2) Laboratory test results were not associated with mortality, and were inconsistent for LOS (very low quality of evidence); (3) Viral testing results were not associated with ICU admission, and were inconsistent for hospitalization (very low quality of evidence). In infants with severe disease: serum procalcitonin and c-reactive protein testing at ICU admission had some benefit in predicting bacterial co-infection and/or pneumonia (very low quality evidence). Evidence was lacking for infants with unexpected deterioration.
CONCLUSIONS: Very low certainty evidence indicates that CXR, laboratory and viral testing may have limited clinical utility in individual management of typical bronchiolitis, and should not be routinely used in this group. Further research is required in subgroups with unexpected deterioration or severe disease.
METHODS: An overview of reviews and systematic review of primary studies were conducted. MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed, Cochrane Library, CINAHL were searched (2000 to 19/02/25) for systematic reviews and primary studies evaluating investigations in bronchiolitis management at hospital. Risk of bias (ROBIS, NOS) and certainty of evidence (GRADE) were evaluated. Results were narratively synthesized.
RESULTS: Thirty/28,602 publications were included (N = 23,605 infants, N = 59 studies; three systematic reviews [32 studies], 27 observational studies). In typical bronchiolitis: (1) CXR demonstrated insufficient diagnostic accuracy, increased antibiotic prescriptions, and was not associated with ICU length of stay (LOS) (very low quality of evidence); (2) Laboratory test results were not associated with mortality, and were inconsistent for LOS (very low quality of evidence); (3) Viral testing results were not associated with ICU admission, and were inconsistent for hospitalization (very low quality of evidence). In infants with severe disease: serum procalcitonin and c-reactive protein testing at ICU admission had some benefit in predicting bacterial co-infection and/or pneumonia (very low quality evidence). Evidence was lacking for infants with unexpected deterioration.
CONCLUSIONS: Very low certainty evidence indicates that CXR, laboratory and viral testing may have limited clinical utility in individual management of typical bronchiolitis, and should not be routinely used in this group. Further research is required in subgroups with unexpected deterioration or severe disease.