Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38977797›Full record

GuidelinePediatric research2025

A recommendation for the use of electrical biosensing technology in neonatology.

Lizelle van Wyk, Topun Austin, Bernard Barzilay, Maria Carmen Bravo, Morten Breindahl, Christoph Czernik, Eugene Dempsey, Willem-Pieter de Boode, Willem de Vries, Beate Horsberg Eriksen and 18 more

Erratum issuedAbstract readGuideline
In one paragraph

Guideline in Pediatric research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Observational
  5. Review
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

28 authors.

Lizelle van WykDepartment of Paediatrics and Child Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Stellenbosch University and Tygerberg Hospital, Cape Town, South Africa. lizelle@sun.ac.za.ORCID 0000-0001-9245-3282
Topun AustinNeonatal Intensive Care Unit, Rosie Hospital, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Cambridge, UK.
Bernard BarzilayNeonatal Intensive Care Unit, Assaf Harofeh Medical Center, Tzrifin, Israel.
Maria Carmen BravoDepartment of Neonatology, La Paz University Hospital and IdiPaz, Madrid, Spain.
Morten BreindahlDepartment of Neonatology, Copenhagen University Hospital, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Christoph CzernikDepartment of Neonatology, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Eugene DempseyDepartment of Paediatrics and Child Health, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland.
Willem-Pieter de BoodeDepartment of Neonatology, Radboud University Medical Center, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Amalia Children's Hospital, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Willem de VriesDivision of Woman and Baby, Department of Neonatology, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Wilhelmina Children's Hospital, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Beate Horsberg EriksenDepartment of Paediatrics, Møre and Romsdal Hospital Trust, Ålesund, Norway.
Jean-Claude FauchéreDepartment of Neonatology, University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Elisabeth M W KooiDivision of Neonatology, Department of Pediatrics, Beatrix Children's Hospital, University of Groningen, University Medical Centre, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Philip T LevyDepartment of Newborn Medicine, Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
Patrick J McNamaraDepartment of Paediatrics, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, USA.
Subhabrata MitraInstitute for Women's Health, University College London, London, UK.
Eirik NestaasInstitute of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.
Heike RabeBrighton and Sussex Medical School, University of Sussex, Brighton, UK.
Yacov RabiUniversity of Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Sheryle R RogersonNewborn Research Centre, The Royal Women's Hospital, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Marilena SavoiaNeonatal Intensive Care Unit, S Maria Della Misericordia Hospital, Udine, Italy.
Frederico SchenaOspedale Maggiore Policlinico, Milano, Italy.
Arvind SehgalMonash Newborn, Monash Children's Hospital, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Christoph E SchwarzDepartment of Neonatology, Center for Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.
Ulrich ThomeDivision of Neonatology, Department of Pediatrics, University of Leipzig Medical Centre, Leipzig, Germany.
David van LaereNeonatal Intensive Care Unit, Universitair Ziekenhuis, Antwerp, Belgium.
Gabriela C ZaharieNeonatology Department, University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Iuliu Hatieganu, Cluj -Napoca, Romania.
Samir GuptaDepartment of Engineering, Durham University, Durham, UK.
ESPR Special Interest Group on Non-Invasive Cardiac Output Monitoring

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Non-invasive cardiac output monitoring, via electrical biosensing technology (EBT), provides continuous, multi-parameter hemodynamic variable monitoring which may allow for timely identification of hemodynamic instability in some neonates, providing an opportunity for early intervention that may improve neonatal outcomes. EBT encompasses thoracic (TEBT) and whole body (WBEBT) methods. Despite the lack of relative accuracy of these technologies, as compared to transthoracic echocardiography, the use of these technologies in neonatology, both in the research and clinical arena, have increased dramatically over the last 30 years. The European Society of Pediatric Research Special Interest Group in Non-Invasive Cardiac Output Monitoring, a group of experienced neonatologists in the field of EBT, deemed it appropriate to provide recommendations for the use of TEBT and WBEBT in the field of neonatology. Although TEBT is not an accurate determinant of cardiac output or stroke volume, it may be useful for monitoring longitudinal changes of hemodynamic parameters. Few recommendations can be made for the use of TEBT in common neonatal clinical conditions. It is recommended not to use WBEBT to monitor cardiac output. The differences in technologies, study methodologies and data reporting should be addressed in ongoing research prior to introducing EBT into routine practice. IMPACT STATEMENT: TEBT is not recommended as an accurate determinant of cardiac output (CO) (or stroke volume (SV)). TEBT may be useful for monitoring longitudinal changes from baseline of hemodynamic parameters on an individual patient basis. TEBT-derived thoracic fluid content (TFC) longitudinal changes from baseline may be useful in monitoring progress in respiratory disorders and circulatory conditions affecting intrathoracic fluid volume. Currently there is insufficient evidence to make any recommendations regarding the use of WBEBT for CO monitoring in neonates. Further research is required in all areas prior to the implementation of these monitors into routine clinical practice.

Indexed as

Biosensing TechniquesNeonatologyCardiac OutputHemodynamicsHumansInfant, NewbornMonitoring, Physiologic

Identifiers

PMID38977797
PMCPMC12015118

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.