ArticleJournal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association2021
Comparative efficacy and safety of late surfactant preparations: a retrospective study.
Article in Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Comparison of the Effect of Beractant (Beracsurf) and Proctant Alpha (Curosurf) in Neonatal Respiratory Distress: A Randomized Controlled Trial.Iranian journal of medical sciences · 2025Trial
- Comparison of Clinical Outcomes Between Calfactant and Poractant-Alfa in Preterm Infants with Respiratory Distress Syndrome.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Surfactant treatment at birth in a contemporary cohort of preterm infants with bronchopulmonary dysplasia.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2024Observational
- Use of surfactant beyond respiratory distress syndrome, what is the evidence?Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2024Review
- Less Invasive Surfactant Administration: A Review of Current Evidence of Clinical Outcomes With Beractant.Cureus · 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
13 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveCharacterize the use, efficacy, and safety of poractant alfa and calfactant surfactants compared to beractant in preterm infants receiving late surfactant. STUDY
designWe included infants <37 weeks gestational age (GA) discharged from Pediatrix Medical Group-managed neonatal intensive care units (1997-2017). Efficacy and safety outcomes of interest were analyzed.
resultsOf 184,770 infants administered surfactant at any time, 7846 (4.23%) received late surfactant at a median (25th, 75th percentile) PNA of 8 days (3, 22); specifically, 2976 received poractant alfa (38%), 2890 beractant (37%), and 1936 calfactant (25%). We identified no significant differences in composite efficacy or safety outcomes between surfactants in the primary analysis, but 33-36 week GA infants administered poractant alfa had significantly greater odds of developing a safety event.
conclusionsCompared to beractant, there is no evidence of overall superior efficacy or safety of poractant alfa.
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.