ReviewEuropean journal of pediatrics2007
What is new in ventilation strategies for the neonate?
Review in European journal of pediatrics, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Lung function and respiratory health at school age in ventilated very low birth weight infants.Indian journal of pediatrics · 2014Trial
- Neonatal red blood cell transfusions: searching for better guidelines.Blood transfusion = Trasfusione del sangue · 2011Trial
- [Apllication of nasal synchronous intermittent mandatory ventilation in premature infants with severe respiratory distress syndrome after extubation].Zhongguo dang dai er ke za zhi = Chinese journal of contemporary pediatrics · 2016Article
- Trends in survival among extremely-low-birth-weight infants (less than 1000 g) without significant bronchopulmonary dysplasia.BMC pediatrics · 2012Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A large number of ventilation strategies are now available for the neonate. This review has focused on new information, that is, studies published since 2000 and the implication of their results for current clinical practice. Meta-analysis of randomised trials has demonstrated that assist control and synchronous intermittent mandatory ventilation (SIMV) shortens the duration of ventilation only if started in the recovery rather than the early stage of respiratory disease. A recent randomised trial demonstrated pressure-regulated volume control ventilation may also have no advantages if started early. Weaning by SIMV with pressure support is better (reducing oxygen dependency) than SIMV alone. Meta-analysis of volume-targeted ventilation demonstrated significant reductions in the duration of ventilation and pneumothorax, but the trials were small and of different designs. Volume guarantee may provide more consistent blood gas control. The level of volume targeting appears to be crucial to the success of this technique. Meta-analysis of randomised trials of prophylactic high-frequency oscillation trials has shown a modest reduction in bronchopulmonary dysplasia. Randomised trials have failed to confirm the advantages of nasal continuous positive airway pressure (NCPAP) seen in various non-randomised studies; however, the randomised trials reported to date have been small. Inhaled nitric oxide (NO) does not improve the outcome of prematurely born infants with severe respiratory failure, but early low-dose prolonged iNO appears to have benefits that merit further testing. More randomised trials with long-term outcomes are required to identify the optimal ventilation strategy(ies) for the neonate.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.