Minimisation of blood sampling losses in preterm neonates: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

IF 3.9 2区 医学 Q1 PEDIATRICS
Prathamesh Khedkar, Abhishek Srinivas, Haribalakrishna Balasubramanian, Mayuri Bhanushali, Anitha Ananthan, Diwakar Mohan, Nandkishore Kabra, Shripada C Rao, Sanjay K Patole
{"title":"Minimisation of blood sampling losses in preterm neonates: a systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Prathamesh Khedkar, Abhishek Srinivas, Haribalakrishna Balasubramanian, Mayuri Bhanushali, Anitha Ananthan, Diwakar Mohan, Nandkishore Kabra, Shripada C Rao, Sanjay K Patole","doi":"10.1136/archdischild-2024-328337","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate the effect of minimising blood sampling losses on red blood cell (RBC) transfusion-related outcomes in preterm infants <37 weeks' gestation.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>We searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Google Scholar from inception to October 2024 for studies that evaluated sampling stewardship practices (SSP) in preterm infants during initial hospitalisation. Two authors independently screened articles that evaluated one or more sampling approaches to minimise blood loss or non-invasive methods to avoid sampling losses. Meta-analysis was conducted using a random effects model.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Eighteen studies (4 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and 14 non-randomised studies) were included. Five studies used umbilical cord blood sampling, four used protocol-based sampling and two used retransfusion of sampled blood back to the infant as an SSP. Sampling care bundles were used in seven studies. Meta-analysis showed that SSP reduced early RBC transfusion rates (RCTs: Relative risk(RR) =0.50, 95% CI 0.36, 0.68; non-RCTs: RR=0.78, 95% CI 0.69, 0.90), the average number of transfusions per infant (RCTs: mean difference=-0.4 transfusions, 95% CI -0.68, -0.05; non-RCTs: standardised mean difference=-0.40, 95% CI -0.55, -0.25) and the rates of multiple transfusions (non-RCTs: RR=0.51, 95% CI 0.42, 0.62). There were no significant effects on mortality and other morbidities. Certainty of evidence was high for transfusion-related outcomes and moderate for other outcomes.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>SSPs are associated with a significant reduction in RBC transfusion rates among very and extremely preterm infants. Large RCTs are required to assess the effects of SSP on other important outcomes.</p><p><strong>Prospero registration number: </strong>CRD42024539665.</p>","PeriodicalId":8177,"journal":{"name":"Archives of Disease in Childhood - Fetal and Neonatal Edition","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archives of Disease in Childhood - Fetal and Neonatal Edition","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/archdischild-2024-328337","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PEDIATRICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the effect of minimising blood sampling losses on red blood cell (RBC) transfusion-related outcomes in preterm infants <37 weeks' gestation.

Study design: We searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Google Scholar from inception to October 2024 for studies that evaluated sampling stewardship practices (SSP) in preterm infants during initial hospitalisation. Two authors independently screened articles that evaluated one or more sampling approaches to minimise blood loss or non-invasive methods to avoid sampling losses. Meta-analysis was conducted using a random effects model.

Results: Eighteen studies (4 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and 14 non-randomised studies) were included. Five studies used umbilical cord blood sampling, four used protocol-based sampling and two used retransfusion of sampled blood back to the infant as an SSP. Sampling care bundles were used in seven studies. Meta-analysis showed that SSP reduced early RBC transfusion rates (RCTs: Relative risk(RR) =0.50, 95% CI 0.36, 0.68; non-RCTs: RR=0.78, 95% CI 0.69, 0.90), the average number of transfusions per infant (RCTs: mean difference=-0.4 transfusions, 95% CI -0.68, -0.05; non-RCTs: standardised mean difference=-0.40, 95% CI -0.55, -0.25) and the rates of multiple transfusions (non-RCTs: RR=0.51, 95% CI 0.42, 0.62). There were no significant effects on mortality and other morbidities. Certainty of evidence was high for transfusion-related outcomes and moderate for other outcomes.

Conclusion: SSPs are associated with a significant reduction in RBC transfusion rates among very and extremely preterm infants. Large RCTs are required to assess the effects of SSP on other important outcomes.

Prospero registration number: CRD42024539665.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
9.00
自引率
4.50%
发文量
90
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Archives of Disease in Childhood is an international peer review journal that aims to keep paediatricians and others up to date with advances in the diagnosis and treatment of childhood diseases as well as advocacy issues such as child protection. It focuses on all aspects of child health and disease from the perinatal period (in the Fetal and Neonatal edition) through to adolescence. ADC includes original research reports, commentaries, reviews of clinical and policy issues, and evidence reports. Areas covered include: community child health, public health, epidemiology, acute paediatrics, advocacy, and ethics.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信