Oronasopharyngeal suction at birth: Effects on arterial oxygen saturation

Carrasco, Marcos; Martell, Miguel; Estol, Paul

doi:10.1016/s0022-3476(97)80031-5

Cited by 68 publications

(61 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Previous studies also reported similar findings, but the time to reach 92 % saturation was much lesser in the no suction group (6.8±1.8 minutes) than the suction group (10.2 minutes±3.3). 8,11,12 But, in the present study the median difference was only 1 minute 6 seconds ahead in the wipes group. One small trial reported bradycardia in the routine Suction group while in a RCT by Gungor et al, reported lower mean heart rates in the No-Suction group.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 78%

“…This is based on previous trials reporting it as the lowest acceptable saturation value in term neonates at birth. 8,11,12 In another trial, the mean respiratory rate in the first 24 hrs was used as the primary outcome. 13 The Pulseoximeter used in 2005 by Gungor and associates was system III, infant monitor, Air shields, USA) for monitoring and measurements were documented minutes by minutes.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…8 We aimed to detect a difference of 2 minutes between both the groups. For 80% power and a standard deviation of 3.3 the calculated sample size is 47/group total (94).…”

Section: Sample Size Estimationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

A Randomised controlled equivalency trial on wiping with a cloth (no suction) versus routine suctioning of oronasopharynx at birth, in term neonates born elective Lscs with clear liquor

Ashokraja

Balasankar

Mathiarasan

2017

Int J Contemp Pediatr

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Efficacy of wiping with a cloth compared to suction in routine care is not known. In term elective Lscs with clear liquor, we hypothesise that it has equivalent efficacy with suction.Methods: Randomized controlled equivalency trial with parallel group design. Inclusion criteria was term neonates born elective Lscs, with clear liquor and cried at birth at Government Rajaji Hospital, Madurai. Major congenital anomalies, Depressed or asphyxiated at birth, Meconium staining, Preterm were excluded. The Primary outcome is the time to reach a saturation of 92%. After randomisation, one group received gentle electrical suction and the other wiping of face, mouth and nose using a sterile cloth. The Pulseoximeter readings in the first fifteen minutes of life were transferred to a computer. Other clinical data collected using a Proforma.Results: Among 270 elective Lscs babies, 112 randomized, 58 received suction and 54 wiping. Excluding four babies, 56 Neonates in the suction group and 52 in the no suction group were analysed. The baseline data was similar except for maternal age. The primary outcome, median time to reach 92% saturation is significantly lesser (7 minutes (m)& 6 seconds(s)), [IQR 4m41s, 9m17s] in the no suction group, than the suction group (8 m18 s) [IQR 6m44s, 10m1s] (P value 0.009 ).Conclusions: In term elective LSCS babies with clear liquor and cried at birth, wiping with a sterile cloth has equivalent efficacy compared to suction for routine care.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 78%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A Randomised controlled equivalency trial on wiping with a cloth (no suction) versus routine suctioning of oronasopharynx at birth, in term neonates born elective Lscs with clear liquor

Ashokraja

Balasankar

Mathiarasan

2017

Int J Contemp Pediatr

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…101,102 Deterioration of pulmonary compliance, oxygenation, and cerebral blood flow velocity shown to accompany tracheal suction in intubated infants in the neonatal intensive care unit also suggests the need for caution in the use of suction immediately after birth. [103][104][105] This recommendation remains unchanged. Please refer to the 2010 CoSTR for the latest science review.…”

Section: When Amniotic Fluid Is Clearmentioning

confidence: 99%

Part 13: Neonatal Resuscitation

Wyckoff¹,

Aziz²,

Escobedo³

et al. 2015

Circulation

609

344

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…When a baby's mouth is suctioned with either a bulb syringe or a DeLee trap, this act interferes with the mechanisms to introduce normal flora into the gut. Rather than enhancing the ability for the newborn to breathe, it may in fact disrupt breathing efforts (Carrasco, Martell, & Esto, 1997).…”

Section: Infection In Newborns Following Water Birthmentioning

confidence: 99%