Agreement between Noninvasive Hemoglobin and Laboratory Hemoglobin Measurements in Neonates: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

IF 2.6 3区医学 Q1 PEDIATRICS

Neonatology Pub Date : 2023-01-01 DOI:10.1159/000526100

Santosh Kumar Panda, Alpana Mishra, Pratap Kumar Jena

{"title":"Agreement between Noninvasive Hemoglobin and Laboratory Hemoglobin Measurements in Neonates: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.","authors":"Santosh Kumar Panda, Alpana Mishra, Pratap Kumar Jena","doi":"10.1159/000526100","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background and objective: The noninvasive hemoglobin (NHb) devices are recently evaluated as an alternative to laboratory hemoglobin (LHb) in neonates. This systematic review explores the diagnostic accuracy of NHb devices for neonatal hemoglobin measurement.Methods: Literature related to the comparison of NHb device with LHb in neonates was searched from Medline, PubMed Central, PubMed, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and Scopus databases after PROSPERO registration. The quality of included publications was assessed by QUADAS-2 (Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies). The pooled correlation coefficient and bias (precision) in Bland-Altman difference plots were used for summary statistics using MetaXL 5.0 software.Results: A total of 1,477 paired NHb-LHb observations were analyzed from 1,047 neonates in 10 studies. Massimo radical-pulse co-oximetry (8 studies) and Mediscan-2000 (2 studies) were used for NHb estimation. The pooled correlation coefficient between NHb and LHb was r = 0.94 (95% CI: 0.83-0.98, p < 0.001), and the pooled bias (precision) was -0.013 (1.4) gm/dL between NHb and LHb measurements in Bland-Altman analysis. NHb device had better precision in stable neonates (0.91gm/dL) over sick neonates (1.66 gm/dL).Conclusions: Hemoglobin measurement by NHb is excellently correlated with LHb measurement with a minimal average difference. It may be used as a screening tool for hemoglobin measurement in neonates to avoid frequent phlebotomy.","PeriodicalId":18924,"journal":{"name":"Neonatology","volume":"120 1","pages":"24-32"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neonatology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000526100","RegionNum":3,"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

Background and objective: The noninvasive hemoglobin (NHb) devices are recently evaluated as an alternative to laboratory hemoglobin (LHb) in neonates. This systematic review explores the diagnostic accuracy of NHb devices for neonatal hemoglobin measurement.

Methods: Literature related to the comparison of NHb device with LHb in neonates was searched from Medline, PubMed Central, PubMed, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and Scopus databases after PROSPERO registration. The quality of included publications was assessed by QUADAS-2 (Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies). The pooled correlation coefficient and bias (precision) in Bland-Altman difference plots were used for summary statistics using MetaXL 5.0 software.

Results: A total of 1,477 paired NHb-LHb observations were analyzed from 1,047 neonates in 10 studies. Massimo radical-pulse co-oximetry (8 studies) and Mediscan-2000 (2 studies) were used for NHb estimation. The pooled correlation coefficient between NHb and LHb was r = 0.94 (95% CI: 0.83-0.98, p < 0.001), and the pooled bias (precision) was -0.013 (1.4) gm/dL between NHb and LHb measurements in Bland-Altman analysis. NHb device had better precision in stable neonates (0.91gm/dL) over sick neonates (1.66 gm/dL).

Conclusions: Hemoglobin measurement by NHb is excellently correlated with LHb measurement with a minimal average difference. It may be used as a screening tool for hemoglobin measurement in neonates to avoid frequent phlebotomy.

查看原文本刊更多论文

新生儿无创血红蛋白和实验室血红蛋白测量的一致性:系统回顾和荟萃分析。

背景和目的:最近，无创血红蛋白(NHb)装置被评估为新生儿实验室血红蛋白(LHb)的替代品。本系统综述探讨了NHb设备用于新生儿血红蛋白测量的诊断准确性。方法:在PROSPERO注册后，从Medline、PubMed Central、PubMed、Web of Science、Google Scholar和Scopus数据库中检索有关新生儿使用NHb设备与LHb比较的文献。纳入出版物的质量采用QUADAS-2(诊断准确性研究质量评估)进行评估。采用汇总相关系数和Bland-Altman差异图的偏倚(精度)，采用MetaXL 5.0软件进行汇总统计。结果:10项研究共分析了1047名新生儿的1477对NHb-LHb观察结果。使用Massimo根脉共氧仪(8项研究)和Mediscan-2000(2项研究)估算NHb。Bland-Altman分析中，NHb与LHb的合并相关系数为r = 0.94 (95% CI: 0.83-0.98, p < 0.001)，合并偏倚(精密度)为-0.013 (1.4)gm/dL。稳定新生儿(0.91gm/dL)比患病新生儿(1.66 gm/dL)精度更高。结论:NHb测定血红蛋白与LHb测定具有极好的相关性，且平均差异极小。它可以作为新生儿血红蛋白测量的筛选工具，以避免频繁的静脉切开术。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Neonatology 医学-小儿科

CiteScore

0.60

自引率

4.00%

发文量

审稿时长

6-12 weeks

期刊介绍： This highly respected and frequently cited journal is a prime source of information in the area of fetal and neonatal research. Original papers present research on all aspects of neonatology, fetal medicine and developmental biology. These papers encompass both basic science and clinical research including randomized trials, observational studies and epidemiology. Basic science research covers molecular biology, molecular genetics, physiology, biochemistry and pharmacology in fetal and neonatal life. In addition to the classic features the journal accepts papers for the sections Research Briefings and Sources of Neonatal Medicine (historical pieces). Papers reporting results of animal studies should be based upon hypotheses that relate to developmental processes or disorders in the human fetus or neonate.