ArticleActa paediatrica (Oslo, Norway : 1992)2025
Predicting Surfactant Need at Birth: Failed Validation of a Bedside Method Using Gastric Aspirates.
Article in Acta paediatrica (Oslo, Norway : 1992), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo validate a prototype point-of-care (POC) test for the lecithin/sphingomyelin (L/S) ratio by identifying the optimal L/S cut-off for predicting surfactant need in preterm infants < 30 weeks' gestation using gastric aspirates (GAS) sampled at birth and to assess clinical feasibility.
methodsGAS was sampled within 45 min of birth and analysed using the only available prototype POC L/S test. The primary outcome was the optimal L/S cut-off and diagnostic accuracy in predicting rescue surfactant treatment per European RDS guidelines, assessed by receiver operating characteristics. L/S results were blinded to clinicians. Due to a dispute between clinical investigators and patent holders, legal restrictions prohibit reporting of the primary outcome.
resultsOf 93 eligible infants, 25 were not included: Six cases (6%) had no GAS available, 12 infants (13%) received surfactant before sampling and 7 (8%) other reasons. Of 68 included, 42 (62%) received surfactant, and 40% were treated within 2 h of life (median: 147 min [IQR: 89; 327]).
conclusionWe aimed to validate a POC L/S test but are legally restricted from disclosing results. Clinical applicability seems limited, as a substantial proportion of infants had no GAS available or required surfactant before sampling. The potential to accelerate treatment appears limited.
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.