IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0274882.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparative efficacy and safety of caffeine citrate and aminophylline in treating apnea of prematurity: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Yiqun Miao
  • Yun Zhou
  • Shuliang Zhao
  • Wenwen Liu
  • Aihua Wang
  • Yuanyuan Zhang
  • Yanan Li
  • Huimin Jiang

Abstract

Background: Methylxanthine, including caffeine citrate and aminophylline, is the most common pharmacologic treatment for apnea of prematurity. However, due to the lack of high-quality evidence, there are no clear recommendations or guidelines on how to choose between caffeine and aminophylline. Objective: This meta-analysis aimed to assess the comparative efficacy and safety of caffeine and aminophylline for apnea of prematurity, and provide reliable evidence for clinical medication in the treatment for apnea of prematurity. Methods: PubMed, Scopus, Embase, EBSCO, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases were systematically searched from May 1975 to June 2022. Results: Ten studies including a total of 923 preterm infants were evaluated. Our results showed that there was no significant difference in the effective rate of 1-3days between caffeine and aminophylline (OR 1.05, 95%CI: 0.40–2.74, P = 0.914). However, for side effects such as tachycardia (OR 0.22, 95%CI: 0.13–0.37, P

Suggested Citation

  • Yiqun Miao & Yun Zhou & Shuliang Zhao & Wenwen Liu & Aihua Wang & Yuanyuan Zhang & Yanan Li & Huimin Jiang, 2022. "Comparative efficacy and safety of caffeine citrate and aminophylline in treating apnea of prematurity: A systematic review and meta-analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(9), pages 1-13, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0274882
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0274882
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0274882
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0274882&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0274882?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0274882. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.