Department of Neonatology, Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Department of Pediatrics, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
JAMA Pediatr. 2021 Apr 1;175(4):e210102. doi: 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2021.0102. Epub 2021 Apr 5.
It is unclear which umbilical cord management strategy is the best for preventing mortality and morbidities in preterm infants.
To systematically review and conduct a network meta-analysis comparing 4 umbilical cord management strategies for preterm infants: immediate umbilical cord clamping (ICC), delayed umbilical cord clamping (DCC), umbilical cord milking (UCM), and UCM and DCC.
PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, and Cochrane CENTRAL databases were searched from inception until September 11, 2020.
Randomized clinical trials comparing different umbilical cord management strategies for preterm infants were included.
Data were extracted for bayesian random-effects meta-analysis to estimate the relative treatment effects (odds ratios [OR] and 95% credible intervals [CrI]) and surface under the cumulative ranking curve values.
The primary outcome was predischarge mortality. The secondary outcomes were intraventricular hemorrhage, severe intraventricular hemorrhage, need for packed red blood cell transfusion, and other neonatal morbidities. Confidence in network meta-analysis software was used to assess the quality of evidence and grade outcomes.
Fifty-six studies enrolled 6852 preterm infants. Compared with ICC, DCC was associated with lower odds of mortality (22 trials, 3083 participants; 7.6% vs 5.0%; OR, 0.64; 95% CrI, 0.39-0.99), intraventricular hemorrhage (25 trials, 3316 participants; 17.8% vs 15.4%; OR, 0.73; 95% CrI, 0.54-0.97), and need for packed red blood cell transfusion (18 trials, 2904 participants; 46.9% vs 38.3%; OR, 0.48; 95% CrI, 0.32-0.66). Compared with ICC, UCM was associated with lower odds of intraventricular hemorrhage (10 trials, 645 participants; 22.5% vs 16.2%; OR, 0.58; 95% CrI, 0.38-0.84) and need for packed red blood cell transfusion (9 trials, 688 participants; 47.3% vs 32.3%; OR, 0.36; 95% CrI, 0.23-0.53), with no significant differences for other secondary outcomes. There was no significant difference between UCM and DCC for any outcome.
Compared with ICC, DCC was associated with the lower odds of mortality in preterm infants. Compared with ICC, DCC and UCM were associated with reductions in intraventricular hemorrhage and need for packed red cell transfusion. There was no significant difference between UCM and DCC for any outcome. Further studies directly comparing DCC and UCM are needed.
目前尚不清楚哪种脐带管理策略最适合预防早产儿的死亡率和发病率。
系统回顾和进行网络荟萃分析,比较 4 种早产儿脐带管理策略:立即脐带夹闭(ICC)、延迟脐带夹闭(DCC)、脐带挤奶(UCM)和 UCM 加 DCC。
从建库起至 2020 年 9 月 11 日,在 PubMed、Embase、CINAHL 和 Cochrane 中心数据库中进行检索。
纳入比较不同早产儿脐带管理策略的随机临床试验。
采用贝叶斯随机效应荟萃分析提取数据,以估计相对治疗效果(比值比[OR]和 95%可信区间[CrI])和累积排序曲线下面积值。
主要结局为出院前死亡率。次要结局为脑室出血、严重脑室出血、需要输浓缩红细胞和其他新生儿并发症。使用网络荟萃分析软件评估证据质量并分级结局。
56 项研究纳入 6852 例早产儿。与 ICC 相比,DCC 与较低的死亡率相关(22 项试验,3083 名参与者;7.6% vs 5.0%;OR,0.64;95%CrI,0.39-0.99)、脑室出血(25 项试验,3316 名参与者;17.8% vs 15.4%;OR,0.73;95%CrI,0.54-0.97)和需要输浓缩红细胞(18 项试验,2904 名参与者;46.9% vs 38.3%;OR,0.48;95%CrI,0.32-0.66)。与 ICC 相比,UCM 与较低的脑室出血(10 项试验,645 名参与者;22.5% vs 16.2%;OR,0.58;95%CrI,0.38-0.84)和需要输浓缩红细胞(9 项试验,688 名参与者;47.3% vs 32.3%;OR,0.36;95%CrI,0.23-0.53)的可能性降低相关,其他次要结局无显著差异。UCM 和 DCC 之间任何结局均无显著差异。
与 ICC 相比,DCC 与早产儿死亡率降低相关。与 ICC 相比,DCC 和 UCM 与脑室出血和需要输浓缩红细胞的减少相关。UCM 和 DCC 之间任何结局均无显著差异。需要进一步进行直接比较 DCC 和 UCM 的研究。