Universal practice based management of patent ductus arteriosus in premature neonates in 2025: BRONX PDA protocol and BRONX clinical scoring system (BCSS)
Rattachement africain : us. Niveau de preuve : code pays fourni par la source.
Le résumé fourni par la source
BACKGROUND: Management of hemodynamically significant patent ductus arteriosus (hsPDA) in neonates remains controversial, with wide variation in practice among neonatologists and pediatric cardiologists. METHODS: An IRB-approved anonymous 12-item survey assessing hsPDA screening, treatment preferences, and perceived risks and benefits was distributed to over 5,000 U.S. providers. Responses were statistically analyzed using standard parameters. RESULTS: A total of 462 completed surveys were analyzed (35% cardiologists, 64% neonatologists). Most providers-initiated PDA screening based on clinical condition. Medical therapy was the preferred first-line treatment. Nearly one-third favored conservative management when echocardiographic hsPDA was present with minimal clinical concern, while others delayed intervention beyond the neonatal period. Pediatric cardiologists were more likely than neonatologists to believe PDA closure reduces morbidity and mortality, although most providers still elected to treat hsPDA. Neonatologists favored medical and percutaneous approaches over surgery. CONCLUSION: Significant inter-specialty variation persists in hsPDA management, highlighting the need for standardized, clinically integrated approaches.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Universal practice based management of patent ductus arteriosus in premature neonates in 2025: BRONX PDA protocol and BRONX clinical scoring system (BCSS)
- Date Crossref
- 20/07/2026
- Éditeur
- Springer Science and Business Media LLC
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Les institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.