SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2016
Early removal versus expectant management of central venous catheters in neonates with bloodstream infection.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Surviving sepsis campaign international guidelines for the management of septic shock and sepsis-associated organ dysfunction in children.Intensive care medicine · 2020Guideline
- Early planned removal versus expectant management of peripherally inserted central catheters to prevent infection in newborn infants.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018Pooled it
- Antimicrobial-impregnated central venous catheters for preventing neonatal bloodstream infection: the PREVAIL RCT.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2020Trial
- Peripherally Inserted Central Catheters in Newborns: A Seven-Year Single-Center Experience from a Neonatal Intensive Care Unit.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Article
- Determinants of morbidity and mortality related to health care-associated primary bloodstream infections in neonatal intensive care units: a prospective cohort study from the SEPREVEN trial.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundUncertainty exists regarding the management of newborn infants with a bloodstream infection and a central venous catheter in place. The central venous catheter may act as a nidus for infecting organisms and observational studies have suggested that early removal of the catheter is associated with a lower incidence of persistent or complicated infection. However, since central venous catheters provide secure vascular access to deliver nutrition and medications, the possible harms of early removal versus expectant management also need to be considered.
objectivesTo determine the effect of early removal versus expectant management of central venous catheters on morbidity and mortality in newborn infants with bloodstream infections. SEARCH
methodsWe used the standard search strategy of the Cochrane Neonatal Review Group. This included searches of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2015, Issue 11), MEDLINE (1966 to October 2015), EMBASE (1980 to October 2015), CINAHL (1982 to October 2015), conference proceedings and previous reviews. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials that compared early removal versus expectant management of central venous catheters in neonates with bloodstream infections. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used the standard methods of the Cochrane Neonatal Review Group. MAIN
resultsWe did not identify any eligible randomised controlled trials. AUTHORS'
conclusionsThere are no trial data to guide practice regarding early removal versus expectant management of central venous catheters in newborn infants with bloodstream infections. A simple and pragmatic randomised controlled trial is needed to resolve the uncertainty about optimal management in this common and important clinical scenario.
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.