SynthesisPloS one2022
Comparative efficacy and safety of caffeine citrate and aminophylline in treating apnea of prematurity: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 36 citations in OpenAlex.
- Continuous positive airway pressure versus methylxanthine for apnoea in preterm infants.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025Pooled it
- Methylxanthine Treatment in Neonates Admitted to the Special Care Unit: An Observational Study in Low-Resource Settings.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Early aminophylline is a potential therapy for preventing bronchopulmonary dysplasia in premature infants: a retrospective study.BMC pediatrics · 2025Article
- The Use of Caffeine Citrate in the Management of Neonatal Apnea in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Rapid Systematic Review.Health science reports · 2025Review
- Clinical efficacy of different maintenance doses of caffeine citrate in the treatment of apnea of prematurity.Pakistan journal of medical sciences · 2025Article
- Population Pharmacokinetics of Caffeine in Neonates with Congenital Heart Disease and Associations with Acute Kidney Injury.Journal of clinical pharmacology · 2024Article
- The Babyccino: The Role of Caffeine in the Prevention of Acute Kidney Injury in Neonates-A Literature Review.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Developing and testing a clinical care bundle incorporating caffeine citrate to manage apnoea of prematurity in a resource-constrained setting: a mixed methods clinical feasibility study protocol.Implementation science communications · 2023Article
- Cardiorespiratory and Neuroprotective Effects of Caffeine in Neonate Animal Models.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2023Review
- Effect of Oral Caffeine on Weaning from Mechanical Ventilation in Intubated ICU Patients.Tanaffos · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMethylxanthine, including caffeine citrate and aminophylline, is the most common pharmacologic treatment for apnea of prematurity. However, due to the lack of high-quality evidence, there are no clear recommendations or guidelines on how to choose between caffeine and aminophylline.
objectiveThis meta-analysis aimed to assess the comparative efficacy and safety of caffeine and aminophylline for apnea of prematurity, and provide reliable evidence for clinical medication in the treatment for apnea of prematurity.
methodsPubMed, Scopus, Embase, EBSCO, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases were systematically searched from May 1975 to June 2022.
resultsTen studies including a total of 923 preterm infants were evaluated. Our results showed that there was no significant difference in the effective rate of 1-3days between caffeine and aminophylline (OR 1.05, 95%CI: 0.40-2.74, P = 0.914). However, for side effects such as tachycardia (OR 0.22, 95%CI: 0.13-0.37, P<0.001) and feeding intolerance (OR 0.40, 95%CI: 0.23-0.70, P = 0.001), the incidence rate was lower in the caffeine group compared with the aminophylline group. No significant difference was found in hyperglycemia (OR 0.45, 95%CI: 0.19-1.05, P = 0.064).
conclusionThis meta-analysis reveals that caffeine citrate and aminophylline have similar therapeutic effectiveness on respiratory function, but caffeine has fewer side effects and should be considered first for treatment.
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.