Rapid health technology assessment of bovine pulmonary surfactant versus porcine ones in the treatment of preterm neonates with respiratory distress syndrome
- VernacularTitle:牛/猪肺表面活性物质治疗早产儿呼吸窘迫综合征的快速卫生技术评估
- Author:
Hua GUO
1
;
Yun SHAO
1
;
Lanlan LIU
1
;
Pengfei REN
1
;
Qiang FU
1
;
Nan SUN
1
;
Jianchao ZHOU
1
;
Jian KANG
2
;
Yanli REN
1
Author Information
1. Dept. of Pharmacy，the Third Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University，Zhengzhou 450052，China
2. Dept. of Pharmacy，the First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University，Zhengzhou 450052，China
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
pulmonary surfactant;
preterm neonate
- From:
China Pharmacy
2022;33(22):2786-2790
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
OBJECTIVE To compare the effectiveness，safety and economy of bovine pulmonary surfactant （PS） and porcine PS in the treatment of preterm neonates with respiratory distress syndrome （RDS）. METHODS Retrieved from PubMed，Embase， Cochrane Library，CNKI，SinoMed，Wanfang and health technology assessment （HTA） organization websites and relevant database， HTA report，systematic review/meta-analysis and pharmacoeconomic study about bovine PS versus porcine PS in the treatment of preterm neonates with RDS were included from the inception to Feb 2022. Data extraction and quality evaluation were carried out for the included literature，and then research results were summarized and analyzed descriptively. RESULTS A total of 1 HTA report，6 systematic reviews/meta-analyses，and 6 pharmacoeconomic studies were included. There appeared to be no significant differences between bovine PS and porcine PS in terms of time staying in neonatal intensive care unit and extra-pulmonary outcomes. In terms of PS re-treatment，blood gas index，total effective rate and the incidence of patent ductus arteriosus，porcine PS was superior to bovine PS. Results from other indicators，such as mortality， the incidence of bronchopulmonary dysplasia，air leakage syndrome，pulmonary hemorrhage，were still controversial. In terms of economy，there was no statistical difference in average hospital charges and administration cost per dose between two groups （P＞0.05）； compared with porcine PS，mean wastage cost per dose of bovine PS was higher （P＜0.001），and 24 h treatment cost of bovine PS was lower （P＜0.05）； the results of average medication cost were controversial. CONCLUSIONS The effectiveness， safety and economy of bovine PS are found to be similar or inferior to porcine PS. It is not certain whether the inferiority has clinical significance.
