Summary of findings 2. Inhaled NO at moderate compared with severe criteria for illness severity in respiratory failure among infants born at or near term.
| Inhaled NO at moderate compared with severe criteria for illness severity in respiratory failure among infants born at or near term | ||||||
| Patient or population: infants born at or near term in respiratory failure Setting: neonatal intensive care units Intervention: inhaled NO at moderate criteria for illness severity (earlier iNO) Comparison: inhaled NO at severe criteria for illness severity (later iNO) | ||||||
| Outcomes | Anticipated absolute effects* (95% CI) | Relative effect (95% CI) | Number of participants (studies) | Quality of the evidence (GRADE) | Comments | |
| Risk with inhaled NO at severe criteria for illness severity | Risk with Inhaled NO at moderate criteria for illness severity | |||||
| Death or requirement for ECMO | Study population | RR 0.88 (0.62 to 1.27) | 495 (5 RCTs) | ⊕⊕⊝⊝ Lowa,b | ||
| 192 per 1000 | 169 per 1000 (119 to 244) | |||||
| Death before hospital discharge | Study population | RR 0.69 (0.38 to 1.26) | 495 (5 RCTs) | ⊕⊕⊕⊝ Moderateb | ||
| 100 per 1000 | 69 per 1000 (38 to 126) | |||||
| Use of ECMO before hospital discharge | Study population | RR 1.01 (0.66 to 1.54) | 439 (4 RCTs) | ⊕⊕⊕⊝ Moderateb | ||
| 144 per 1000 | 146 per 1000 (95 to 222) | |||||
| Progression to severe criteria | Study population | RR 0.66 (0.55 to 0.79) | 512 (6 RCTs) | ⊕⊕⊕⊝ Moderateb | ||
| 595 per 1000 | 392 per 1000 (327 to 470) | |||||
| Neurodevelopmental disability at 18 to 24 months among survivors | Study population | RR 1.13 (0.74 to 1.74) | 234 (1 RCT) | ⊕⊕⊕⊝ Moderateb | ||
| 248 per 1000 | 280 per 1000 (183 to 431) | |||||
| *The risk in the intervention group (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI). CI: confidence interval; OR: odds ratio; RR: risk ratio. | ||||||
| GRADE Working Group grades of evidence. High quality: We are very confident that the true effect lies close to the estimate of effect. Moderate quality: We are moderately confident in the effect estimate: The true effect is likely to be close to the estimate of effect but may be substantially different. Low quality: Our confidence in the effect estimate is limited: The true effect may be substantially different from the estimate of effect. Very low quality: We have very little confidence in the effect estimate: The true effect is likely to be substantially different from the estimate of effect. | ||||||
aHighly variable risk ratio.
bVery wide confidence intervals.