Cargando…

Continuous positive airway pressure for term and ≥34(+0) weeks’ gestation newborns at birth: A systematic review

BACKGROUND: Respiratory distress is common during transition after birth, but the effect of continuous positive airway pressure applied in the delivery room has not been systematically evaluated in spontaneously breathing term and ≥34(+0) weeks’ gestation infants. We aimed to compare delivery room c...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Shah, Birju A., Fabres, Jorge G., Leone, Tina A., Schmölzer, Georg M., Szyld, Edgardo G.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9649384/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36386766
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.resplu.2022.100320
_version_ 1784827786336141312
author Shah, Birju A.
Fabres, Jorge G.
Leone, Tina A.
Schmölzer, Georg M.
Szyld, Edgardo G.
author_facet Shah, Birju A.
Fabres, Jorge G.
Leone, Tina A.
Schmölzer, Georg M.
Szyld, Edgardo G.
author_sort Shah, Birju A.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Respiratory distress is common during transition after birth, but the effect of continuous positive airway pressure applied in the delivery room has not been systematically evaluated in spontaneously breathing term and ≥34(+0) weeks’ gestation infants. We aimed to compare delivery room continuous positive airway pressure with no delivery room continuous positive airway pressure for term and ≥34(+0) weeks’ gestation newborn infants at birth. METHODS: Information sources: Medline, Embase, Cochrane Databases, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature. The Databases were last searched in October 2021. Eligibility criteria: Randomized, quasi-randomized, interrupted time series, controlled before-after, and cohort studies with English abstracts. Synthesis of results: Two authors independently extracted data, assessed risk of bias, and certainty of evidence. The main outcome was admission to the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) or higher level of care receiving any positive pressure support. Data were pooled using fixed effects models. Risk of bias: Was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool for randomized trials and the Non-Randomized Studies of Interventions Tool (ROBINS-I) for observational studies. RESULTS: In this meta-analysis, two randomized control trials (323 newborns delivered by cesarean section) showed that delivery room continuous positive airway pressure decreased the likelihood of NICU admission (risk ratio (RR) 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.27 (0.11–0.66), p < 0.005) and NICU respiratory support (RR (95% CI) 0.18 (0.05–0.60), p = 0.005) when compared with no delivery room continuous positive airway pressure. However, in two before-after studies (8,476 newborns), delivery room continuous positive airway pressure use was associated with an increased risk of air leak syndrome when compared with no delivery room continuous positive airway pressure. DISCUSSION: Certainty of evidence was very low for all outcomes. Among term and ≥34(+0) weeks’ gestation infants having or at risk of having respiratory distress, there is insufficient evidence to suggest for or against routine use of continuous positive airway pressure in the delivery room. Funding: No Funding has been received to conduct this study. Clinical Trial Registration: This systematic review has been registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/) [identifier: CRD42021225812].
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9649384
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Elsevier
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-96493842022-11-15 Continuous positive airway pressure for term and ≥34(+0) weeks’ gestation newborns at birth: A systematic review Shah, Birju A. Fabres, Jorge G. Leone, Tina A. Schmölzer, Georg M. Szyld, Edgardo G. Resusc Plus Review BACKGROUND: Respiratory distress is common during transition after birth, but the effect of continuous positive airway pressure applied in the delivery room has not been systematically evaluated in spontaneously breathing term and ≥34(+0) weeks’ gestation infants. We aimed to compare delivery room continuous positive airway pressure with no delivery room continuous positive airway pressure for term and ≥34(+0) weeks’ gestation newborn infants at birth. METHODS: Information sources: Medline, Embase, Cochrane Databases, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature. The Databases were last searched in October 2021. Eligibility criteria: Randomized, quasi-randomized, interrupted time series, controlled before-after, and cohort studies with English abstracts. Synthesis of results: Two authors independently extracted data, assessed risk of bias, and certainty of evidence. The main outcome was admission to the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) or higher level of care receiving any positive pressure support. Data were pooled using fixed effects models. Risk of bias: Was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool for randomized trials and the Non-Randomized Studies of Interventions Tool (ROBINS-I) for observational studies. RESULTS: In this meta-analysis, two randomized control trials (323 newborns delivered by cesarean section) showed that delivery room continuous positive airway pressure decreased the likelihood of NICU admission (risk ratio (RR) 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.27 (0.11–0.66), p < 0.005) and NICU respiratory support (RR (95% CI) 0.18 (0.05–0.60), p = 0.005) when compared with no delivery room continuous positive airway pressure. However, in two before-after studies (8,476 newborns), delivery room continuous positive airway pressure use was associated with an increased risk of air leak syndrome when compared with no delivery room continuous positive airway pressure. DISCUSSION: Certainty of evidence was very low for all outcomes. Among term and ≥34(+0) weeks’ gestation infants having or at risk of having respiratory distress, there is insufficient evidence to suggest for or against routine use of continuous positive airway pressure in the delivery room. Funding: No Funding has been received to conduct this study. Clinical Trial Registration: This systematic review has been registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/) [identifier: CRD42021225812]. Elsevier 2022-11-08 /pmc/articles/PMC9649384/ /pubmed/36386766 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.resplu.2022.100320 Text en © 2022 The Authors https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Review
Shah, Birju A.
Fabres, Jorge G.
Leone, Tina A.
Schmölzer, Georg M.
Szyld, Edgardo G.
Continuous positive airway pressure for term and ≥34(+0) weeks’ gestation newborns at birth: A systematic review
title Continuous positive airway pressure for term and ≥34(+0) weeks’ gestation newborns at birth: A systematic review
title_full Continuous positive airway pressure for term and ≥34(+0) weeks’ gestation newborns at birth: A systematic review
title_fullStr Continuous positive airway pressure for term and ≥34(+0) weeks’ gestation newborns at birth: A systematic review
title_full_unstemmed Continuous positive airway pressure for term and ≥34(+0) weeks’ gestation newborns at birth: A systematic review
title_short Continuous positive airway pressure for term and ≥34(+0) weeks’ gestation newborns at birth: A systematic review
title_sort continuous positive airway pressure for term and ≥34(+0) weeks’ gestation newborns at birth: a systematic review
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9649384/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36386766
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.resplu.2022.100320
work_keys_str_mv AT shahbirjua continuouspositiveairwaypressurefortermand340weeksgestationnewbornsatbirthasystematicreview
AT fabresjorgeg continuouspositiveairwaypressurefortermand340weeksgestationnewbornsatbirthasystematicreview
AT leonetinaa continuouspositiveairwaypressurefortermand340weeksgestationnewbornsatbirthasystematicreview
AT schmolzergeorgm continuouspositiveairwaypressurefortermand340weeksgestationnewbornsatbirthasystematicreview
AT szyldedgardog continuouspositiveairwaypressurefortermand340weeksgestationnewbornsatbirthasystematicreview
AT continuouspositiveairwaypressurefortermand340weeksgestationnewbornsatbirthasystematicreview