| Title |
Effectiveness of prothrombin complex concentrate (PCC) in neonates and infants with bleeding or risk of bleeding: a systematic review and meta-analysis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
European Journal of Pediatrics, March 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00431-017-2877-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Linan Zeng, Imti Choonara, Lingli Zhang, Youping Li, Jing Shi |
| Abstract |
To systematically evaluate the effectiveness of prothrombin complex concentrate (PCC) in neonates and infants, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis based on current evidence. Quality of studies was assessed by Cochrane Collaboration's risk of bias tool and Newcastle-Ottawa quality assessment scale. For dichotomous data, we obtained the number of events and total number and calculated the relative risk (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). For continuous variables, we obtained mean and standard deviation (SD) values and calculated mean difference (MD) with 95% CI. We identified six trials and two cohort studies. For trials, selection bias and performance bias were high, while detection bias, attrition bias, and reporting bias were relatively low. For cohort studies, selection bias was low. Both individual studies and meta-analysis failed to find any benefit of PCC on mortality. Meta-analysis also failed to show any benefit in reducing intracranial hemorrhage. The effectiveness of PCC on the correction of hemostatic defects was inconsistent among studies. In addition, PCC was not more effective than fresh frozen plasma (FFP) in correcting hemostatic defects. There is insufficient evidence to allow a recommendation for use of PCC in neonates and infants. What is Known: • Prothrombin Complex Concentrate is becoming increasingly used off-label for treatment of neonates and infants with severe bleeding or risk of severe bleeding. • Some case reports showed PCC seemed to be effective for infants and children with coagulation factor deficiency, but evidence about the effectiveness of PCC to reverse serious Vitamin K Deficiency Bleeding is limited. What is New: • As far as we know, this is the first systematic review that evaluates the effectiveness of PPC in neonates with bleeding or risk of bleeding. • There is insufficient evidence to allow a recommendation for use of PCCs in neonates and infants. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands | 2 | 29% |
| Spain | 2 | 29% |
| Unknown | 3 | 43% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 43% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 29% |
| Scientists | 1 | 14% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 14% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 40 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 40 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 7 | 18% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 10% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 8% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 3 | 8% |
| Professor | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 9 | 23% |
| Unknown | 12 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 13 | 33% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 8% |
| Psychology | 3 | 8% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 5% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 4 | 10% |
| Unknown | 14 | 35% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 11 March 2017.
All research outputs
#6,849,129
of 22,958,253 outputs
Outputs from European Journal of Pediatrics
#1,305
of 3,740 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#109,453
of 307,900 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Journal of Pediatrics
#16
of 54 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,958,253 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,740 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 307,900 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 54 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.