Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16774295›Full record

ReviewPaediatric drugs2006

Necrotizing enterocolitis: a practical guide to its prevention and management.

Pinaki Panigrahi

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Paediatric drugs, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 40 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. The children of the missed pill.Journal of health economics · 2021
    Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Risk factors for necrotizing enterocolitis totalis: a case-control study.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2011
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Pinaki PanigrahiDepartment of Pediatrics, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, USA. ppanigrahi@pol.net
University of Maryland, Baltimore · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Neonatal necrotizing enterocolitis is the second most common cause of morbidity in premature infants and requires intensive care over an extended period. Despite advances in medical and surgical techniques, the mortality and long-term morbidity due to necrotizing enterocolitis remain very high. Recent advances have shifted the attention of researchers from the classic triad (ischemia, bacteria, and the introduction of a metabolic substrate into the intestine) of necrotizing enterocolitis, to gut maturation, feeding practices, and inflammation. The focus on inflammation includes proinflammatory cytokines such as tumor necrosis factor-alpha, interleukin (IL)-6, IL-18, and platelet-activating factor. Research related to the etiology of necrotizing enterocolitis has moved quickly from clostridial toxin to bacterial and other infectious agents. More recently, the pattern of bacterial colonization has been given emphasis rather than the particular species or strain of bacteria or their virulence. Gram-negative bacteria that form part of the normal flora are now speculated as important factors in triggering the injury process in a setting where there is a severe paucity of bacterial species and possible lack of protective Gram-positive organisms. Although the incidence of necrotizing enterocolitis has increased because of the survival of low birthweight infants, clinicians are more vigilant in their detection of the early gastrointestinal symptoms of necrotizing enterocolitis; however, radiographic demonstration of pneumatosis intestinalis remains the hallmark of necrotizing enterocolitis. With prompt diagnosis, a large proportion of infants with necrotizing enterocolitis are now able to be managed medically with intravenous fluid and nutrition, nasogastric suction, antibacterials, and close monitoring of physiologic parameters. In the advanced cases that require surgery, clinicians tend to opt for either simple peritoneal drainage (for very small and sick infants) or laparotomy and resection of the affected part. Intestinal transplantation later in life is available as a viable option for those who undergo resection of large segments of the intestine. It is becoming more evident that treatment of this devastating disease is expensive and comes with the toll of significant long-term sequelae. This has resulted in renewed interest in designing alternative strategies to prevent this serious gastrointestinal disease. Simple trophic feeding and the use of L-glutamine and arginine are novel avenues that have been examined. The use of probiotics ('friendly' bacterial flora) has been introduced as a promising tool for establishing healthy bacterial flora in the newborn gut to block the injury process that may ultimately lead to necrotizing enterocolitis.

Indexed as

Enterocolitis, NecrotizingHumansInfantInfant, NewbornPractice Guidelines as Topic

Identifiers

PMID16774295
OpenAlexW2330539323

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.