ArticleProgress in pediatric cardiology2020
Timing of umbilical cord clamping among infants with congenital heart disease.
Article in Progress in pediatric cardiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06153459 (CORD-CHD), which is not on this map. Cited by 3 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.
CORD-CHD: Clamp OR Delay Among Neonates With Congenital Heart Disease
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Development and implementation of educational modules on management of neonates with critical congenital heart disease in the delivery room (LEARN-CHD).Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2026Trial
- Call to action: prioritizing delivery room care for neonates with critical congenital heart disease.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2024Article
- Fetal-to-Neonatal Transition of an Infant with Transposition of the Great Arteries and Intact Ventricular Septum: A Case Report.Biomedicine hubArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The optimal timing of clamping and cutting the umbilical cord at birth among infants with congenital heart disease (CHD) remains a subject of controversy and debate. The benefits of delayed umbilical cord clamping (DCC) among term infants without CHD are well described, but the evidence base for DCC among infants with CHD has not been characterized adequately. The goals of the present review are to: 1) compare outcomes of DCC versus early cord clamping (ECC) in term (≥37 weeks of gestation) infants; 2) discuss potential risk/benefit profiles in applying DCC among term infants with CHD; 3) use rigorous systematic review methodology to assess the quality and quantity of published reports on cord clamping practices among term infants with CHD; 4) identify needs and opportunities for future research and interdisciplinary collaboration. Our systematic review shows that previous trials have largely excluded infants with CHD. Therefore, the supposition that DCC is advantageous because it is associated with improved neurologic and hematologic outcome is untested in the CHD population. Given that CHD is markedly heterogeneous, to minimize unnecessary and potentially harmful cord clamping practices, identification of subgroups (single-ventricle, cyanotic lesions) most likely to benefit from optimal cord clamping practices is necessary to optimize risk/benefit profiles. The available evidence base suggests that contemporary, pragmatic, randomized controlled trials comparing DCC with ECC among infants with CHD are needed.
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.