Beractant and poractant alfa in premature neonates with respiratory distress syndrome: a systematic review of real-world evidence studies and randomized controlled trials
Loading...
Official URL
Full text at PDC
Publication date
2020
Advisors (or tutors)
Editors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Springer Nature
Citations
Exportar
Citation
Sánchez Luna M, Bacher P, Unnebrink K, Martinez-Tristani M, Ramos Navarro C. Beractant and poractant alfa in premature neonates with respiratory distress syndrome: a systematic review of real-world evidence studies and randomized controlled trials. J Perinatol. 2020 Aug;40(8):1121-1134. doi: 10.1038/s41372-020-0603-7. Epub 2020 Feb 12. PMID: 32051542; PMCID: PMC7375954.
Abstract
Findings from previous meta-analyses of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) in premature infants with respiratory distress syndrome (RDS) varied as to whether clinical outcomes differed by type of animal-derived pulmonary surfactant; real-world evidence (RWE) was excluded. We extracted study characteristics and outcomes from full-text articles from a systematic search for studies that compared beractant with poractant alfa for RDS in preterm infants. RWE data were tabulated; RCT data were subjected to meta-analyses. Designs, patient characteristics, and follow-up durations varied widely among studies (4 RWE, 15 RCT). RWE studies with adjusted odds ratios (ORs) found no statistically significant between-treatment differences in outcomes. In RCT meta-analyses, no statistically significant between-treatment differences were observed for death (OR [95% confidence interval], 1.35 [0.98-1.86]), bronchopulmonary dysplasia (1.25 [0.96-1.62]), pneumothorax (1.21 [0.72-2.05]), and air leak syndrome (2.28 [0.82-6.39]). Collectively, outcomes were similar with beractant and poractant alfa in RWE studies and pooled RCTs.