Intermittent phototherapy versus continuous phototherapy for neonatal jaundice.


Journal

The Cochrane database of systematic reviews
ISSN: 1469-493X
Titre abrégé: Cochrane Database Syst Rev
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100909747

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
02 03 2023
Historique:
pmc-release: 02 03 2024
entrez: 3 3 2023
pubmed: 4 3 2023
medline: 8 3 2023
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Phototherapy is a widely accepted, effective first-line therapy for neonatal jaundice. It is traditionally used continuously but intermittent phototherapy has been proposed as an equally effective alternative with practical advantages of improved maternal feeding and bonding. The effectiveness of intermittent phototherapy compared with continuous phototherapy is unknown. To assess the safety and effectiveness of intermittent phototherapy compared with continuous phototherapy. Searches were conducted on 31 January 2022 in the following databases: CENTRAL via CRS Web, MEDLINE and Embase via Ovid. We also searched clinical trials databases and the reference lists of retrieved articles for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-randomised trials. We included RCTs, cluster-RCTs and quasi-RCTs comparing intermittent phototherapy with continuous phototherapy in jaundiced infants (both term and preterm) up to the age of 30 days. We compared intermittent phototherapy with continuous phototherapy by any method and at any dose and duration as defined by the authors. Three review authors independently selected trials, assessed trial quality and extracted data from included studies. We performed fixed-effect analyses and expressed treatment effects as mean difference (MD), risk ratio (RR) and risk difference (RD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Our primary outcomes of interest were rate of decline of serum bilirubin, and kernicterus. We used the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of evidence. We included 12 RCTs (1600 infants) in the review. There is one ongoing study and four awaiting classification. There was little or no difference between intermittent phototherapy and continuous phototherapy with respect to rate of decline of bilirubin in jaundiced newborn infants (MD -0.09 micromol/L/hr, 95% CI -0.21 to 0.03; I² = 61%; 10 studies; 1225 infants; low-certainty evidence). One study involving 60 infants reported no incidence of bilirubin induced brain dysfunction (BIND). It is uncertain whether either intermittent or continuous phototherapy reduces BIND because the certainty of this evidence is very low. There was little or no difference in treatment failure (RD 0.03, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.15; RR 1.63, 95% CI 0.29 to 9.17; 1 study; 75 infants; very low-certainty evidence) or infant mortality (RD -0.01, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.01; RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.31 I² = 0%; 10 studies, 1470 infants; low-certainty evidence).  AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The available evidence detected little or no difference between intermittent and continuous phototherapy with respect to rate of decline of bilirubin. Continuous phototherapy appears to be more effective in preterm infants, however, the risks of continuous phototherapy and the potential benefits of a slightly lower bilirubin level are unknown. Intermittent phototherapy is associated with a decrease in the total number of hours of phototherapy exposure. There are theoretical benefits to intermittent regimens but there are important safety outcomes that were inadequately addressed. Large, well designed, prospective trials are needed in both preterm and term infants before it can be concluded that intermittent and continuous phototherapy regimens are equally effective.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
Phototherapy is a widely accepted, effective first-line therapy for neonatal jaundice. It is traditionally used continuously but intermittent phototherapy has been proposed as an equally effective alternative with practical advantages of improved maternal feeding and bonding. The effectiveness of intermittent phototherapy compared with continuous phototherapy is unknown.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the safety and effectiveness of intermittent phototherapy compared with continuous phototherapy.
SEARCH METHODS
Searches were conducted on 31 January 2022 in the following databases: CENTRAL via CRS Web, MEDLINE and Embase via Ovid. We also searched clinical trials databases and the reference lists of retrieved articles for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-randomised trials.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included RCTs, cluster-RCTs and quasi-RCTs comparing intermittent phototherapy with continuous phototherapy in jaundiced infants (both term and preterm) up to the age of 30 days. We compared intermittent phototherapy with continuous phototherapy by any method and at any dose and duration as defined by the authors.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Three review authors independently selected trials, assessed trial quality and extracted data from included studies. We performed fixed-effect analyses and expressed treatment effects as mean difference (MD), risk ratio (RR) and risk difference (RD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Our primary outcomes of interest were rate of decline of serum bilirubin, and kernicterus. We used the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of evidence.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 12 RCTs (1600 infants) in the review. There is one ongoing study and four awaiting classification. There was little or no difference between intermittent phototherapy and continuous phototherapy with respect to rate of decline of bilirubin in jaundiced newborn infants (MD -0.09 micromol/L/hr, 95% CI -0.21 to 0.03; I² = 61%; 10 studies; 1225 infants; low-certainty evidence). One study involving 60 infants reported no incidence of bilirubin induced brain dysfunction (BIND). It is uncertain whether either intermittent or continuous phototherapy reduces BIND because the certainty of this evidence is very low. There was little or no difference in treatment failure (RD 0.03, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.15; RR 1.63, 95% CI 0.29 to 9.17; 1 study; 75 infants; very low-certainty evidence) or infant mortality (RD -0.01, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.01; RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.31 I² = 0%; 10 studies, 1470 infants; low-certainty evidence).  AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The available evidence detected little or no difference between intermittent and continuous phototherapy with respect to rate of decline of bilirubin. Continuous phototherapy appears to be more effective in preterm infants, however, the risks of continuous phototherapy and the potential benefits of a slightly lower bilirubin level are unknown. Intermittent phototherapy is associated with a decrease in the total number of hours of phototherapy exposure. There are theoretical benefits to intermittent regimens but there are important safety outcomes that were inadequately addressed. Large, well designed, prospective trials are needed in both preterm and term infants before it can be concluded that intermittent and continuous phototherapy regimens are equally effective.

Identifiants

pubmed: 36867730
doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD008168.pub2
pmc: PMC9979775
doi:

Substances chimiques

Bilirubin RFM9X3LJ49

Types de publication

Systematic Review Journal Article Review Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

CD008168

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2023 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Références

Arch Dis Child. 1965 Dec;40(214):666-71
pubmed: 5844956
Pediatrics. 2007 May;119(5):1036-7; author reply 1037-8
pubmed: 17473111
Am J Dis Child. 1970 Jun;119(6):473-7
pubmed: 5443334
Pediatrics. 1993 Feb;91(2):470-3
pubmed: 8424029
Exp Ther Med. 2019 May;17(5):4007-4012
pubmed: 30988782
Pediatrics. 2004 Jul;114(1):297-316
pubmed: 15231951
Eur J Pediatr. 2015 Feb;174(2):177-81
pubmed: 25005717
J Pediatr. 1974 Oct;85(4):563-66
pubmed: 4443869
Pediatrics. 1986 Jul;78(1):10-4
pubmed: 3725477
Arch Dis Child. 1984 Sep;59(9):892-4
pubmed: 6486869
Pediatrics. 2008 Jan;121(1):e170-9
pubmed: 18166536
N Engl J Med. 2008 Feb 28;358(9):920-8
pubmed: 18305267
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2023 Mar 02;3:CD008168
pubmed: 36867730
Pediatrics. 2001 Mar;107(3):E41
pubmed: 11230622
Am J Dis Child. 1972 Aug;124(2):230-2
pubmed: 5066064
Pediatrics. 1985 Feb;75(2 Pt 2):387-92
pubmed: 3881730
S Afr Med J. 2006 Sep;96(9):819-24
pubmed: 17068653
Pediatrics. 1986 Nov;78(5):837-43
pubmed: 3763296
Adv Pediatr. 1980;27:341-89
pubmed: 7194571
Indian J Med Res. 2021 Apr;153(4):446-452
pubmed: 34380790
JAMA Pediatr. 2020 Jul 1;174(7):649-656
pubmed: 32338720
J Adv Nurs. 2021 Jan;77(1):12-22
pubmed: 33150664
J Med Assoc Thai. 2002 Nov;85(11):1176-81
pubmed: 12546314
Lancet. 1982 Aug 21;2(8295):408-10
pubmed: 6124805
Arch Dermatol. 2004 Apr;140(4):493-4
pubmed: 15096388
J Paediatr Child Health. 1994 Aug;30(4):341-4
pubmed: 7946548
J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2019 Apr;32(8):1280-1284
pubmed: 29130829
Acta Paediatr. 2006 Nov;95(11):1418-23
pubmed: 17062470
Med J Malaysia. 2004 Aug;59(3):395-401
pubmed: 15727387
J Trop Pediatr. 2015 Apr;61(2):113-8
pubmed: 25617633
Wiad Lek. 1994 Apr;47(7-8):284-7
pubmed: 7941580
Pediatr Res. 1982 Aug;16(8):670-4
pubmed: 7110789
Pediatr Res. 1978 Feb;12(2):92-4
pubmed: 643384
N Engl J Med. 2008 Oct 30;359(18):1885-96
pubmed: 18971491
J Pediatr. 1973 Jan;82(1):73-6
pubmed: 4681870
J Pediatr. 1978 Apr;92(4):627-30
pubmed: 633026
Arch Dis Child. 1974 Jan;49(1):60-2
pubmed: 4818094
Ugeskr Laeger. 1991 Apr 8;153(15):1044-6
pubmed: 2024325
Ann Pediatr (Paris). 1984 Apr;31(4):297-301
pubmed: 6430204
Lancet. 1972 Dec 9;2(7789):1211-2
pubmed: 4117705
Pediatrics. 1985 Feb;75(2 Pt 2):385-441
pubmed: 3881729
J Clin Epidemiol. 2009 Oct;62(10):1006-12
pubmed: 19631508
Clin Pediatr (Phila). 1992 Jun;31(6):353-6
pubmed: 1628468
Neonatal Netw. 2001 Aug;20(5):41-8
pubmed: 12144221

Auteurs

Sasi Bhushan Gottimukkala (SB)

Newborn Care, Royal Hospital for Women, Randwick, Australia.

Lisha Lobo (L)

Central Coast Health District, Gosford, Australia.

Kanekal S Gautham (KS)

Nemours Children's Hospital, Orlando, USA.

Srinivas Bolisetty (S)

Newborn Care, Royal Hospital for Women, Randwick, Australia.

Michelle Fiander (M)

Cochrane Neonatal Group, Halifax, Canada.

Tim Schindler (T)

Newborn Care, Royal Hospital for Women, Randwick, Australia.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH