Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41216939›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2025

Indications and timings for caffeine initiation in preterm infants.

Franciszek Borys, Katarzyna Wróblewska-Seniuk, Michelle Fiander, Roger Soll, Martin Ringsten, Matteo Bruschettini, Greta Sibrecht, supported by Cochrane Neonatal and Cochrane Sweden

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Franciszek BorysII Department of Neonatology, Poznan University of Medical Sciences, Poznan, Poland.
Katarzyna Wróblewska-SeniukII Department of Neonatology, Poznan University of Medical Sciences, Poznan, Poland.
Michelle FianderCochrane Neonatal Group, Burlington, Vermont, USA.
Roger SollCochrane Neonatal Group, Burlington, Vermont, USA.
Martin RingstenCochrane Sweden, Department of Research, Development, Education and Innovation, Lund University, Skåne University Hospital, Lund, Sweden.
Matteo BruschettiniCochrane Sweden, Department of Research, Development, Education and Innovation, Lund University, Skåne University Hospital, Lund, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0002-4775-872X
Greta SibrechtII Department of Neonatology, Poznan University of Medical Sciences, Poznan, Poland.
supported by Cochrane Neonatal and Cochrane Sweden

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

rationaleCaffeine is commonly used in preterm infants to improve respiratory function. However, the optimal strategies for caffeine initiation have not been defined.

objectivesTo evaluate the relative benefits and harms of different indications and timings for caffeine initiation in preterm infants. SEARCH

methodsWe searched MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, and trial registries up to 23 April 2025. We searched conference abstracts, checked references of related systematic reviews and included studies, and searched for errata/retractions of included studies. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) including cluster-RCTs and quasi-RCTs comparing different indications for caffeine initiation in preterm infants: • within two hours of life (C2H) versus 2 to 24 hours; • within 72 hours of life (C72H) versus after 72 hours; • C72H versus treatment of symptomatic infants; • while on mechanical ventilation versus caffeine initiated at the time of extubation; • initiated with minimal symptoms versus with moderate-to-severe apnea. OUTCOMES: Critical outcomes: all-cause mortality, chronic lung disease (CLD), and adverse events. Important outcomes: duration of mechanical ventilation (DMV) (days), duration of hospital stay (DHS) until discharge (days), apnea, intermittent hypoxemia (IH), acute kidney injury, severe intraventricular hemorrhage, cerebral palsy, developmental delay, intellectual impairment, blindness, and sensorial deafness. RISK OF BIAS: We used the Cochrane Risk of bias tool 2.0. SYNTHESIS

methodsWe conducted meta-analyses using fixed-effect models to calculate risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and mean difference (MD) for dichotomous and continuous outcomes, respectively. We summarized the certainty of evidence according to GRADE methods. INCLUDED STUDIES: We included 11 RCTs enrolling 774 infants with gestational age ranging from 23 to 34 weeks. Studies were published between 2014 and 2023. The 11 studies compared caffeine initiated: • C2H versus 2 to 24 hours (3 studies); • C72H versus after 72 hours (3 studies); • C72H versus treatment of symptomatic infants (2 studies); • while on mechanical ventilation versus caffeine initiated at the time of extubation (3 studies). No studies compared caffeine initiated with minimal symptoms versus caffeine initiated with moderate-to-severe apnea. We identified seven ongoing studies. SYNTHESIS OF

resultsC2H compared to caffeine initiated 2 to 24 hours: the evidence is very uncertain about the effect on CLD (RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.35 to 1.17; I² = 0%; 2 studies, 81 participants; very low-certainty evidence) and on DMV (MD 3.00, 95% CI -3.16 to 9.16; I² not applicable; 1 study, 21 participants; very low-certainty evidence). No studies reported two critical outcomes: all-cause mortality until hospital discharge and any adverse event. No studies reported DHS or apnea. C72H compared to caffeine initiated after 72 hours of life: the evidence is very uncertain about the effect on mortality (RR 2.00, 95% CI 0.19 to 21.36; I² not applicable; 1 study, 100 participants; very low-certainty evidence), DMV (MD 0.05, 95% CI -0.53 to 0.62; I² = 97%; 2 studies, 177 participants; very low-certainty evidence), and DHS (MD -4.59, 95% CI -10.51 to 1.33; I² not applicable; 1 study, 90 participants; very low-certainty evidence). C72H likely reduces CLD (RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.40 to 1.03; I² = 5%; 2 studies, 177 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) and apnea (number of infants with at least one episode, defined as interruption of breathing for more than 20 seconds until hospital discharge) (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.90; I² = 81%; 2 studies, 177 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). No studies reported any adverse events. C72H for asymptomatic infants compared to treatment of symptomatic infants may result in little to no difference in all-cause mortality until hospital discharge (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.47 to 1.92; I² not applicable; 1 study, 163 participants; low-certainty evidence) or in any adverse event leading to caffeine cessation until hospital discharge compared to caffeine treatment of symptomatic infants (RR 0.27, 95% CI 0.01 to 6.56; I² not applicable; 1 study, 163 participants; low-certainty evidence). It likely reduces CLD (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.94; I² = 0%; 2 studies, 219 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about DMV (MD -0.81, 95% CI -1.89 to 0.27; 1 study, 56 participants; very low-certainty evidence) and DHS (MD -1.43, 95% CI -4.90 to 2.04; 1 study, 56 participants; very low-certainty evidence). No studies reported apnea. Caffeine initiated during mechanical ventilation compared to caffeine initiated at the time of extubation may reduce CLD (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.50 to 1.18; I² = 0%; 2 studies, 142 participants; low-certainty evidence) and may result in a large reduction in DMV (MD -1.90, 95% CI -3.14 to -0.66; I² not applicable; 1 study, 59 participants; low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect on all-cause mortality (RR 1.69, 95% CI 0.66 to 4.33; I² = 0%; 2 studies, 142 participants; very low-certainty evidence). No studies reported any adverse events, apnea, or DHS. No studies in any comparison reported the outcome IH. AUTHORS'

conclusionsThe evidence is very uncertain about the effect of C2H and C72 on CLD and DMV compared to caffeine initiated within 24 hours of life and after 72 hours of life in high-risk preterm infants, respectively. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of C72 on DHS. C72H likely reduces CLD and apnea. In high-risk preterm infants, C72H compared to caffeine treatment of symptomatic infants only, may result in little to no difference in all-cause mortality until hospital discharge, but likely reduces CLD. C72H of life may result in little to no difference in any adverse event leading to caffeine cessation. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of C72H on DMV and DHS. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect on all-cause mortality until hospital discharge of caffeine initiated while on mechanical ventilation compared to initiated at time of extubation. Caffeine initiated while on mechanical ventilation may reduce CLD and may result in a large reduction in DMV. No studies reported any adverse events, apnea, or DHS. The results of ongoing studies might change the findings of this review.

fundingThis Cochrane review had dedicated funding: Forska Utan Djurförsök and ALF grant. REGISTRATION: PROSPERO: crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD42024595715.

Indexed as

CaffeineCentral Nervous System StimulantsInfant, PrematureApneaBiasHumansInfant, NewbornInfant, Premature, DiseasesLength of StayLung DiseasesRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicRespiration, ArtificialTime FactorsCaffeineCentral Nervous System Stimulants

Identifiers

PMID41216939
PMCPMC12604083

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.