ArticlePediatrics2014
Prophylactic indomethacin and intestinal perforation in extremely low birth weight infants.
Article in Pediatrics, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 34 citations in OpenAlex.
- Use of NSAIDs and acetaminophen and risk of spontaneous intestinal perforations in premature infants: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2024Pooled it
- Role of Nutrition in Prevention of Neonatal Spontaneous Intestinal Perforation and Its Complications: A Systematic Review.Nutrients · 2020Pooled it
- Promising Preventive Strategies for Intraventricular Hemorrhage in Preterm Neonates: A Critical Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Association of Intrapartum Drugs with Spontaneous Intestinal Perforation: A Single-Center Retrospective Review.American journal of perinatology · 2024Review
- Prophylactic indomethacin, antenatal betamethasone, and the risk of intestinal perforation in infants <28 weeks' gestation.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2023Observational
- Antenatal Steroids, Prophylactic Indomethacin, and the Risk of Spontaneous Intestinal Perforation.The Journal of pediatrics · 2023Article
- Single cell analysisFrontiers in immunology · 2023Article
- Patent ductus arteriosus and spontaneous intestinal perforation in a cohort of preterm infants.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2022Article
- Patent Ductus Arteriosus of the Preterm Infant.Pediatrics · 2020Review
- A single-dose indomethacin prophylaxis for reducing perinatal brain injury in extremely low birth weight infants: a non-inferiority analysis.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2019Article
- Management of neonatal spontaneous intestinal perforation by peritoneal needle aspiration.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2018Article
- Effect of prophylactic indomethacin administration and early feeding on spontaneous intestinal perforation in extremely low-birth-weight infants.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2017Article
- Blood Level of Inter-Alpha Inhibitor Proteins Distinguishes Necrotizing Enterocolitis From Spontaneous Intestinal Perforation.The Journal of pediatrics · 2017Article
- Enteral feeding during indomethacin treatment for patent ductus arteriosus: association with gastrointestinal outcomes.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
20 authors at 10 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveProphylactic indomethacin reduces severe intraventricular hemorrhage but may increase spontaneous intestinal perforation (SIP) in extremely low birth weight (ELBW) infants. Early feedings improve nutritional outcomes but may increase the risk of SIP. Despite their benefits, use of these therapies varies largely by physician preferences in part because of the concern for SIP.
methodsThis was a cohort study of 15,751 ELBW infants in the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Neonatal Research Network from 1999 to 2010 who survived beyond 12 hours after birth. The risk of SIP was compared between groups of infants with and without exposure to prophylactic indomethacin and early feeding in unadjusted analyses and in analyses adjusted for center and for risks of SIP.
resultsAmong infants exposed to prophylactic indomethacin, the risk of SIP did not differ between the indomethacin/early-feeding group compared with the indomethacin/no-early-feeding group (adjusted relative risk [RR] 0.74, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.49-1.11). The risk of SIP was lower in the indomethacin/early-feeding group compared with the no indomethacin/no-early-feeding group (adjusted RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.37-0.90, P = .0159). Among infants not exposed to indomethacin, early feeding was associated with a lower risk of SIP compared with the no early feeding group (adjusted RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.36-0.777, P = .0011).
conclusionsThe combined or individual use of prophylactic indomethacin and early feeding was not associated with an increased risk of SIP in ELBW infants.
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.