ArticleThe journal of pediatric pharmacology and therapeutics : JPPT : the official journal of PPAG2021
Comparison of Neonatal Outcomes With and Without Prophylaxis With Indomethacin in Premature Neonates.
Article in The journal of pediatric pharmacology and therapeutics : JPPT : the official journal of PPAG, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- A FAR-Out approach for evaluating the impact of clinical practice changes on severe intracranial hemorrhage in preterm infants.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2026Article
- Pathogenesis and Prevention of Intraventricular Hemorrhage in Preterm Infants.Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society · 2023Article
- Developmental pharmacokinetics of indomethacin in preterm neonates: Severely decreased drug clearance in the first week of life.CPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology · 2023Article
- Pharmacotherapy in Bronchopulmonary Dysplasia: What Is the Evidence?Frontiers in pediatrics · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveHistorically, prophylactic indomethacin (pINDO) has been used in some institutions for patent ductus arteriosus (PDA) in extremely low birthweight neonates while other institutions have used it as prophylaxis for intraventricular hemorrhage (IVH). The objective of this study was to evaluate the incidence of IVH and PDA with or without pINDO in premature neonates.
methodsThis was a retrospective, single-center study comparing neonatal outcomes in neonates weighing 1250 grams or less who received pINDO (pINDO group) to those who did not (No pINDO group) after our institution discontinued its routine use.
resultsA total of 399 infants were included for analysis (pINDO, n = 141; No pINDO, n = 258). No difference was found between pINDO and No pINDO groups in incidence of any IVH (18% vs 14%, respectively) or severe IVH (7% vs 3%, respectively) when adjusting for gestational age and antenatal corticosteroids. Although the incidence of moderate-to-large PDA was lower in the pINDO group (13% vs 23%, respectively, adjusted p = 0.002), there was no significant difference for PDA requiring surgery (4% vs 3%, respectively). Results demonstrated a higher incidence of bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD) in the pINDO group (55% vs 41%, respectively, adjusted p = 0.014).
conclusionNo difference in the incidence of IVH, severe IVH, or PDA requiring surgery was observed between groups, whereas an increase in BPD was seen with use of pINDO. These data support our institutional practice change to discontinue routine use of pINDO in premature neonates. Further research is needed to guide clinical practice.
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.