ArticleArchives of disease in childhood. Fetal and neonatal edition2024
Impact of cord clamping on haemodynamic transition in term newborn infants.
Article in Archives of disease in childhood. Fetal and neonatal edition, 2024. 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, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Impact of early versus delayed cord clamping on oxidative stress in neonates with intrauterine growth restriction: a prospective randomized controlled trial.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2025Trial
- Deferred cord clamping in twin pregnancies: benefit, risk, or missed opportunity? A narrative review.Resuscitation plus · 2026Review
- Case Report: Left ventricular hemorrhage associated with early neonatal mortality in multi-gene engineered cloned pigs.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2026Article
- Hemodynamic precision to guide surgical timing for neonates with congenital diaphragmatic hernia: a narrative review.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2025Review
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 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo assess the haemodynamic consequences of cord clamping (CC) in healthy term infants.
designCohort study.
settingTertiary maternity hospital. PATIENTS: 46 full-term vigorous infants born by caesarean section.
interventionsEchocardiography was performed before CC, immediately after CC and at 5 min after birth.
main outcome measuresPulsed wave Doppler-derived cardiac output and the pulmonary artery acceleration time indexed to the right ventricle ejection time were obtained. As markers of loading fluctuations, the myocardial performance indexes and the velocities of the tricuspid and mitral valve annuli were determined with tissue Doppler imaging. Heart rate was derived from Doppler imaging throughout the assessments.
resultsLeft ventricular output increased throughout the first minutes after birth (mean (SD) 222.4 (32.5) mL/kg/min before CC vs 239.7 (33.6) mL/kg/min at 5 min, p=0.01), while right ventricular output decreased (306.5 (48.2) mL/kg/min before vs 272.8 (55.5) mL/kg/min immediately after CC, p=0.001). The loading conditions of both ventricles were transiently impaired by CC, recovering at 5 min. Heart rate progressively decreased after birth, following a linear trend temporarily increased by CC. The variation in left ventricular output across the CC was directly correlated to the fluctuation of left ventricular preload over the same period (p
conclusionsThis study illustrates the cardiovascular consequences of CC in term vigorous infants and offers insight into the haemodynamic transition from fetal to neonatal circulation in spontaneously breathing newborns. Strategies that aim to enhance left ventricular preload before CC may prevent complications of perinatal cardiovascular imbalance.
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.