镰状细胞病孕妇预防性输血与按需输血:随机对照试验的系统回顾和荟萃分析

EJHaem Pub Date : 2025-04-24 DOI:10.1002/jha2.1086
Denise Menezes Brunetta, Evangelia Vlachodimitropoulou, Nita Prasannan, Paul T. Seed, Eugene Oteng-Ntim
{"title":"镰状细胞病孕妇预防性输血与按需输血:随机对照试验的系统回顾和荟萃分析","authors":"Denise Menezes Brunetta,&nbsp;Evangelia Vlachodimitropoulou,&nbsp;Nita Prasannan,&nbsp;Paul T. Seed,&nbsp;Eugene Oteng-Ntim","doi":"10.1002/jha2.1086","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Introduction</h3>\n \n <p>Sickle cell disease (SCD) poses significant risks during pregnancy. Transfusions are the only recommended treatment, but there is no strong evidence of its efficacy. The aim of this study was to evaluate prophylactic transfusion on pregnancy outcomes.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis (PROSPERO-CRD42024510511), using MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane, Web of Science, and Maternity and Infant Care. No date or language restrictions were applied. Inclusion criteria comprised randomised-controlled trials (RCTs) involving SCD pregnancy, comparing maternal and foetal outcomes for prophylactic versus on-demand transfusions. Two independent reviewers performed screening, selection, and data extraction, following PRISMA. Two authors independently assessed certainty and risk-of-bias. Data were pooled using random-effects model. Primary outcomes included mortality, vaso-occlusive crisis (VOC), acute chest syndrome, venous thromboembolism and preterm delivery. The measure of the effect was the unadjusted odds ratio (OR), calculated from numbers of events.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Ninety-one studies were identified and two RCTs (106 patients) were included, with uncertain and low risk of bias. Prophylactic transfusions reduced VOC, OR of 0.197 (95% CI 0.08–0.49). However, due to the small number of patients, this meta-analysis was underpowered to evaluate other outcomes.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>A larger RCT is needed to comprehensively assess the impact of prophylactic transfusion in SCD pregnancy.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":72883,"journal":{"name":"EJHaem","volume":"6 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/jha2.1086","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Prophylactic versus on-demand transfusion in pregnant women with sickle cell disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials\",\"authors\":\"Denise Menezes Brunetta,&nbsp;Evangelia Vlachodimitropoulou,&nbsp;Nita Prasannan,&nbsp;Paul T. Seed,&nbsp;Eugene Oteng-Ntim\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/jha2.1086\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Introduction</h3>\\n \\n <p>Sickle cell disease (SCD) poses significant risks during pregnancy. Transfusions are the only recommended treatment, but there is no strong evidence of its efficacy. The aim of this study was to evaluate prophylactic transfusion on pregnancy outcomes.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis (PROSPERO-CRD42024510511), using MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane, Web of Science, and Maternity and Infant Care. No date or language restrictions were applied. Inclusion criteria comprised randomised-controlled trials (RCTs) involving SCD pregnancy, comparing maternal and foetal outcomes for prophylactic versus on-demand transfusions. Two independent reviewers performed screening, selection, and data extraction, following PRISMA. Two authors independently assessed certainty and risk-of-bias. Data were pooled using random-effects model. Primary outcomes included mortality, vaso-occlusive crisis (VOC), acute chest syndrome, venous thromboembolism and preterm delivery. The measure of the effect was the unadjusted odds ratio (OR), calculated from numbers of events.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>Ninety-one studies were identified and two RCTs (106 patients) were included, with uncertain and low risk of bias. Prophylactic transfusions reduced VOC, OR of 0.197 (95% CI 0.08–0.49). However, due to the small number of patients, this meta-analysis was underpowered to evaluate other outcomes.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\\n \\n <p>A larger RCT is needed to comprehensively assess the impact of prophylactic transfusion in SCD pregnancy.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":72883,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"EJHaem\",\"volume\":\"6 2\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/jha2.1086\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"EJHaem\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jha2.1086\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"EJHaem","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jha2.1086","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

镰状细胞病(SCD)在妊娠期间具有显著的风险。输血是唯一推荐的治疗方法,但没有强有力的证据表明其有效性。本研究的目的是评估预防性输血对妊娠结局的影响。方法采用MEDLINE、EMBASE、Cochrane、Web of Science和母婴护理系统进行系统评价和荟萃分析(PROSPERO-CRD42024510511)。没有日期或语言限制。纳入标准包括涉及SCD妊娠的随机对照试验(rct),比较预防性输血与按需输血的母婴结局。两名独立的审稿人按照PRISMA进行筛选、选择和数据提取。两位作者独立评估了确定性和偏倚风险。采用随机效应模型对数据进行汇总。主要结局包括死亡率、血管闭塞危象(VOC)、急性胸综合征、静脉血栓栓塞和早产。衡量效果的方法是未调整的优势比(OR),由事件数计算得出。结果纳入91项研究和2项随机对照试验(106例患者),不确定且低偏倚风险。预防性输血减少VOC, OR为0.197 (95% CI 0.08-0.49)。然而,由于患者数量较少,该荟萃分析不足以评估其他结果。结论需要更大规模的随机对照试验来全面评估预防性输血对SCD妊娠的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Prophylactic versus on-demand transfusion in pregnant women with sickle cell disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

Prophylactic versus on-demand transfusion in pregnant women with sickle cell disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

Introduction

Sickle cell disease (SCD) poses significant risks during pregnancy. Transfusions are the only recommended treatment, but there is no strong evidence of its efficacy. The aim of this study was to evaluate prophylactic transfusion on pregnancy outcomes.

Methods

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis (PROSPERO-CRD42024510511), using MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane, Web of Science, and Maternity and Infant Care. No date or language restrictions were applied. Inclusion criteria comprised randomised-controlled trials (RCTs) involving SCD pregnancy, comparing maternal and foetal outcomes for prophylactic versus on-demand transfusions. Two independent reviewers performed screening, selection, and data extraction, following PRISMA. Two authors independently assessed certainty and risk-of-bias. Data were pooled using random-effects model. Primary outcomes included mortality, vaso-occlusive crisis (VOC), acute chest syndrome, venous thromboembolism and preterm delivery. The measure of the effect was the unadjusted odds ratio (OR), calculated from numbers of events.

Results

Ninety-one studies were identified and two RCTs (106 patients) were included, with uncertain and low risk of bias. Prophylactic transfusions reduced VOC, OR of 0.197 (95% CI 0.08–0.49). However, due to the small number of patients, this meta-analysis was underpowered to evaluate other outcomes.

Conclusion

A larger RCT is needed to comprehensively assess the impact of prophylactic transfusion in SCD pregnancy.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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