Observational studyBMJ paediatrics open2025
Does early-targeted risk-based management of a patent ductus arteriosus improve outcomes in preterm infants? Insights from an observational study.
Observational study in BMJ paediatrics open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Making sense of the evidence: designing randomised controlled trials for preterm infants with high-shunt volume patent ductus arteriosus.Archives of disease in childhood. Fetal and neonatal edition · 2026Review
- Early protocol-based echocardiographic assessment and management of patent ductus arteriosus in infants less than 29 weeks' gestation.BMJ paediatrics open · 2025Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study evaluates the outcomes of an early-targeted patent ductus arteriosus (PDA) management strategy in preterm infants using the EL-Khuffash PDA Severity Score (PDAsc) for risk stratification. The objective was to compare outcomes between high- and low-risk infants from an early-targeted treatment epoch and a historical reference epoch who were risk stratified but did not undergo treatment.
methodsWe conducted a single-centre, observational cohort study in a level III neonatal intensive care unit. Infants born <29 weeks gestation were stratified into high- and low-risk groups using the PDAsc. High-risk infants in the early-targeted treatment epoch received medical intervention, while low-risk infants did not. Outcomes from this epoch were compared with a historical reference epoch in which risk was assigned but treatment was not implemented. The primary outcomes included chronic lung disease (CLD), ventilation days and oxygen days.
resultsA total of 110 high-risk and 74 low-risk infants were identified in the early-targeted epoch, compared with 84 high-risk and 51 low-risk infants in the reference epoch. High-risk infants in the early-targeted treatment epoch who achieved successful PDA closure demonstrated fewer ventilation days (median 5 vs 11), fewer oxygen days (median 45 vs 65) and a lower incidence of CLD (59% vs 76%) compared with high-risk infants in the reference epoch. However, high-risk infants in the early-targeted treatment epoch who failed treatment experienced outcomes similar to high-risk infants in the reference epoch. Low-risk infants in both epochs exhibited comparable favourable outcomes.
conclusionsThe implementation of early-targeted risk-based PDA management may be associated with improved respiratory outcomes in high-risk infants who successfully responded to treatment. However, the observational nature of this study limits causal inferences. These findings underscore the need for further research, including randomised controlled trials with improved patient selection, to better understand the relationship between stratified treatment and important outcomes.
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.