MedicalResearch.com Interview with:
Cynthia Gyamfi-Bannerman, MD, MSc
Vice Chair for Faculty Development
Ellen Jacobson Levine and Eugene Jacobson Professor of OBGYN
Director, Maternal-Fetal Medicine Fellowship Program
Co-Director, CUMC Preterm Birth Prevention CenterMedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study? Response:Delayed cord clamping (DCC) at delivery has been associated with neonatal benefit. Specially, it decreases the likelihood of anemia. It became widely recommended as a practice for all deliveries even though the literature showing benefit to the neonates was largely only for low risk women with vaginal deliveries. In theory, DCC could result in increased blood loss during a cesarean due to the blood loss encountered when cutting into a gravid uterus. (more…)
MedicalResearch.com Interview with:
Abhay K Lodha MD, DM, MSc
Department of Pediatrics
Alberta Health Services MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study? Response: There is no physiological rationale for clamping the umbilical cord immediately after birth. In moderate (32+0 weeks-33+6 weeks) and late preterm infants (34+0 to 36+6), delayed cord clamping reduces the need for blood transfusions, leads to circulatory stability and improves blood pressure.
However, the information on the association of delayed cord clamping with outcomes for extremely low gestational age neonates (22-28 weeks of gestation) is limited.
(more…)
MedicalResearch.com Interview with:
Arpitha Chiruvolu MD FAAP
Neonatologist
Baylor University Medical Center
Department of Neonatology
Dallas, TX 75246MedicalResearch: What is the background and main findings of the study?Dr.Chiruvolu: There is growing evidence that delaying umbilical cord clamping (DCC) in very preterm infants may improve hemodynamic stability after birth and decrease the incidence of major neonatal morbidities such as intraventricular hemorrhage (IVH) and necrotizing enterocolitis. Recently, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) published a committee opinion that supported delaying umbilical cord clamping in preterm infants, with the possibility for a nearly 50% reduction in IVH. However, the practice of DCC in preterm infants has not been widely adopted, mainly due to the concern of a delay in initiating resuscitation in this vulnerable population. Furthermore, there is uncertainty regarding the magnitude of published benefits in very preterm infants, since prior trials were limited by small sample sizes, wide variability in the technique and inconsistent reporting of factors that may have contributed to clinical outcomes.
We recently implemented a delaying umbilical cord clamping quality improvement (QI) process in very preterm infants at a large delivery hospital. The objective of this cohort study was to evaluate the clinical consequences of a protocol-driven delayed umbilical cord clamping implementation in singleton infants born £ 32 weeks gestation. We hypothesized that DCC would not compromise initial resuscitation and would be associated with significant decrease in early red blood cell transfusions and IVH compared to a historic cohort.
Delayed umbilical cord clamping was performed on all the 60 eligible infants. 88 infants were identified as historic controls. Gestational age, birth weight and other demographic variables were similar between both groups. There were no differences in Apgar scores or admission temperature, but significantly fewer infants in theDelayed umbilical cord clamping cohort were intubated in delivery room, had respiratory distress syndrome or received red blood cell transfusions in the first week of life compared to the historic cohort. A significant reduction was noted in the incidence of IVH inDelayed umbilical cord clamping cohort compared to historic control group (18.3% versus 35.2%). After adjusting for gestational age, an association was found between the incidence of IVH and Delayed umbilical cord clamping with IVH significantly lower in the DCC cohort compared to historic cohort with odds ratio of 0.36 (95% CI 0.15 to 0.84, P <0.05). There were no significant differences in mortality and other major morbidities.
(more…)
This website uses cookies to improve your experience. We'll assume you're ok with this, but you can opt-out if you wish.AcceptRejectRead More
Privacy & Cookies Policy
Privacy Overview
This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these cookies, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are as essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may have an effect on your browsing experience.
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.