Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19436610›Full record

ArticleTherapeutics and clinical risk management2009

Animal-derived surfactants for the treatment and prevention of neonatal respiratory distress syndrome: summary of clinical trials.

J Wells Logan, Fernando R Moya

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Therapeutics and clinical risk management, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 19% 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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 29 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Surfactant therapy for bronchiolitis in critically ill infants.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2015
    Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Comparative biophysical study of clinical surfactants using constrained drop surfactometry.American journal of physiology. Lung cellular and molecular physiology · 2024
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Pulmonary surfactant as a versatile biomaterial to fight COVID-19.Journal of controlled release : official journal of the Controlled Release Society · 2022
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Comparative efficacy and safety of late surfactant preparations: a retrospective study.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2021
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. The role of surfactant in respiratory distress syndrome.The open respiratory medicine journal · 2012
    Article
  18. Article
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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

J Wells LoganDepartment of Neonatology, Southeast Area Health Educational Center, New Hanover Regional Medical Center, Wilmington, NC, USA.
Fernando R Moya
Pediatrics and Genetics · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionAvailable literature suggests that the advantage of animal-derived surfactants over first-generation synthetic agents derives from the presence of surface-active proteins and their phospholipid content. Here we summarize the results of clinical trials comparing animal-derived surfactant preparations with other animal-derived surfactants and with both first-and second-generation synthetic surfactants.

methodsPublished clinical trials of comparisons of animal-derived surfactants were summarized and compared. Comparisons emphasized differences in (1) key surfactant components attributed with efficacy and (2) differences in published outcomes.

resultsFor the most important outcomes, mortality and chronic lung disease, currently available natural surfactants are essentially similar in efficacy. When examining secondary outcomes (pneumothorax, ventilator weaning, and need for supplemental oxygen), it appears that both calfactant and poractant have an advantage over beractant. The weight of the evidence, especially for study design and secondary outcomes, favors the use of calfactant. However, the superiority of poractant over beractant, when the higher initial dose of poractant is used, strengthens the case for use of poractant as well.

conclusionsClinical trials suggest that the higher surfactant protein-B content in calfactant, and perhaps the higher phospholipid content in poractant (at higher initial dose), are the factors that most likely confer the observed advantage over other surfactant preparations.

Identifiers

PMID19436610
PMCPMC2697515
OpenAlexW2087838900

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.