Pediatrics · 2011
Inhaled nitric oxide in preterm infants: an individual-patient data meta-analysis of randomized trials.
СтатьяМетаанализПоддержка NIH: внешняя программаПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание 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.
Askie Lisa M, Ballard Roberta A, Cutter Gary R, Dani Carlo, Elbourne Diana, Field David, Hascoet Jean-Michel, Hibbs Anna Maria, Kinsella John P, Mercier Jean-Christophe, Rich Wade, Schreiber Michael D, Wongsiridej Pimol Srisuparp, Subhedar Nim V, Van Meurs Krisa P, Voysey Merryn, Barrington Keith, Ehrenkranz Richard A, Finer Neil N, Meta-analysis of Preterm Patients on Inhaled Nitric Oxide Collaboration
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Inhaled nitric oxide (iNO) is an effective therapy for pulmonary hypertension and hypoxic respiratory failure in term infants. Fourteen randomized controlled trials (n = 3430 infants) have been conducted on preterm infants at risk for chronic lung disease (CLD). The study results seem contradictory.
DESIGN/METHODS: Individual-patient data meta-analysis included randomized controlled trials of preterm infants (<37 weeks' gestation). Outcomes were adjusted for trial differences and correlation between siblings.
RESULTS: Data from 3298 infants in 12 trials (96%) were analyzed. There was no statistically significant effect of iNO on death or CLD (59% vs 61%: relative risk [RR]: 0.96 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.92-1.01]; P = .11) or severe neurologic events on imaging (25% vs 23%: RR: 1.12 [95% CI: 0.98-1.28]; P = .09). There were no statistically significant differences in iNO effect according to any of the patient-level characteristics tested. In trials that used a starting iNO dose of >5 vs ≤ 5 ppm there was evidence of improved outcome (interaction P = .02); however, these differences were not observed at other levels of exposure to iNO. This result was driven primarily by 1 trial, which also differed according to overall dose, duration, timing, and indication for treatment; a significant reduction in death or CLD (RR: 0.85 [95% CI: 0.74-0.98]) was found.
CONCLUSIONS: Routine use of iNO for treatment of respiratory failure in preterm infants cannot be recommended. The use of a higher starting dose might be associated with improved outcome, but because there were differences in the designs of these trials, it requires further examination.
DESIGN/METHODS: Individual-patient data meta-analysis included randomized controlled trials of preterm infants (<37 weeks' gestation). Outcomes were adjusted for trial differences and correlation between siblings.
RESULTS: Data from 3298 infants in 12 trials (96%) were analyzed. There was no statistically significant effect of iNO on death or CLD (59% vs 61%: relative risk [RR]: 0.96 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.92-1.01]; P = .11) or severe neurologic events on imaging (25% vs 23%: RR: 1.12 [95% CI: 0.98-1.28]; P = .09). There were no statistically significant differences in iNO effect according to any of the patient-level characteristics tested. In trials that used a starting iNO dose of >5 vs ≤ 5 ppm there was evidence of improved outcome (interaction P = .02); however, these differences were not observed at other levels of exposure to iNO. This result was driven primarily by 1 trial, which also differed according to overall dose, duration, timing, and indication for treatment; a significant reduction in death or CLD (RR: 0.85 [95% CI: 0.74-0.98]) was found.
CONCLUSIONS: Routine use of iNO for treatment of respiratory failure in preterm infants cannot be recommended. The use of a higher starting dose might be associated with improved outcome, but because there were differences in the designs of these trials, it requires further examination.