ReviewO&G open2024
Prenatal Predictors of Survival in Isolated Congenital Diaphragmatic Hernia: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
Review in O&G open, 2024. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate prenatal fetal imaging findings associated with survival to hospital discharge, persistent pulmonary hypertension (PH), and need for extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) in fetuses with isolated congenital diaphragmatic hernia (CDH) that are undergoing prenatal expectant management. DATA SOURCES: A systematic search was conducted in MEDLINE through PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and The Cochrane Central, and ClinicalTrials.gov from 2000 up to July 2023. METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION: Studies that reported on prenatal imaging in fetuses with isolated CDH that were undergoing expectant management were included. Primary outcomes were survival to hospital discharge, persistent PH within 28 days of age, and need for ECMO. The quality of studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Meta-analysis was performed when at least two studies reported on the same prenatal imaging evaluation. Subgroup analyses were performed according to the side (left or right) of CDH. TABULATION INTEGRATION AND
resultsA total of 161 full-text articles were assessed for eligibility, with 48 studies meeting the inclusion criteria: 45 (N=3,977) assessed survival, eight (N=994) assessed persistent PH, and 12 (N=2,085) assessed need for ECMO. The pooled proportion was 2,833 of 3,977 (71.2%, 95% CI, 69.8-72.6%) for survival, 565 of 2,085 (27.1%, 95% CI, 25.2-29.1%) for need for ECMO, and 531 of 994 (53.4%, 95% CI, 50.3-56.6%) for need for persistent PH. Prenatal imaging findings that were significantly associated with survival included: total fetal lung volume (mean difference [MD] 13.42, 95% CI, 11.22-15.62), observed-to-expected (O-E) total fetal lung volume less than 30% (odds ratio [OR] 0.09, 95% CI, 0.05-0.17), O-E total fetal lung volume (MD 14.73, 95% CI, 11.62-17.84,
conclusionSeveral prenatal imaging findings, including lung measurements, intrathoracic liver, and stomach position, were predictive of neonatal survival. Lung measurement was predictive of need for ECMO, and intrathoracic liver was significantly associated with persistent PH and need for ECMO.
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.