You are here

Responses

Article menu
Original research
Umbilical cord milking in preterm infants: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Free
Compose a Response to This Article
Compose Response

More information about text formats

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
Author Information
First or given name, e.g. 'Peter'.
Your last, or family, name, e.g. 'MacMoody'.
Your email address, e.g. higgs-boson@gmail.com
Your role and/or occupation, e.g. 'Orthopedic Surgeon'.
Your organization or institution (if applicable), e.g. 'Royal Free Hospital'.
Statement of Competing Interests

PLEASE NOTE:

  • A rapid response is a moderated but not peer reviewed online response to a published article in a BMJ journal; it will not receive a DOI and will not be indexed unless it is also republished as a Letter, Correspondence or as other content. Find out more about rapid responses.
  • We intend to post all responses which are approved by the Editor, within 14 days (BMJ Journals) or 24 hours (The BMJ), however timeframes cannot be guaranteed. Responses must comply with our requirements and should contribute substantially to the topic, but it is at our absolute discretion whether we publish a response, and we reserve the right to edit or remove responses before and after publication and also republish some or all in other BMJ publications, including third party local editions in other countries and languages
  • Our requirements are stated in our rapid response terms and conditions and must be read. These include ensuring that: i) you do not include any illustrative content including tables and graphs, ii) you do not include any information that includes specifics about any patients,iii) you do not include any original data, unless it has already been published in a peer reviewed journal and you have included a reference, iv) your response is lawful, not defamatory, original and accurate, v) you declare any competing interests, vi) you understand that your name and other personal details set out in our rapid response terms and conditions will be published with any responses we publish and vii) you understand that once a response is published, we may continue to publish your response and/or edit or remove it in the future.
  • By submitting this rapid response you are agreeing to our terms and conditions for rapid responses and understand that your personal data will be processed in accordance with those terms and our privacy notice.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

Vertical Tabs

Other responses

Jump to comment:

  • Published on: 12 June 2021
    Umbilical cord milking is probably better than immediate cord clamping at birth in preterm infants
    • Simone Pratesi, Neonatologist, MD, PhD Careggi University Hospital, Florence, Italy
    • Other Contributors:
      • Carlo Dani, Full Professor of Pediatrics, MD

    Dear Editor,
    we read with great interest the work by Balasubramanian H et al (1). Their systematic review and meta-analysis included 19 randomised controlled trials comparing umbilical cord milking (UCM) with delayed cord clamping (DCC, 5 studies, 922 newborns) and immediate cord clamping (ICC, 14 studies, 1092 newborns) in preterm infants. They concluded that “… cord milking, as compared to delayed cord clamping, significantly increased the risk of severe intraventricular haemorrhage (IVH) in preterm infants <34 weeks gestation”. We believe that this firm conclusion is not supported by the available data: 1) firstly, the gestational age of population in the four analyzed studies ranges from 23 to 31 weeks gestation in three studies (2-4) and from 24 to 32 weeks in one study with no severe IVH reported (5); 2) secondly, at least 20 of the 24 severe IVH events in the UCM group occurred in newborns less than 28 weeks’ gestation (3), while gestational age of newborns with the remaining 4 IVH events is not reported (thus, it actually might be even zero severe IVH in newborns above 27 weeks gestation). Therefore, the increased risk of severe IVH should be referred only to PREMOD 2 infants less than 28 weeks’ gestation (3), and not also extended to infants with 28-33 weeks’ gestation population.
    This metanalysis confirms what we stated in our commentary to PREMOD 2 study (6): UCM procedure demonstrates advantages in comparison to routine practice of ICC at bir...

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.