Responses

Download PDFPDF

Systematic review of intravenous immunoglobulin in haemolytic disease of the newborn
Compose Response

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:

  • Responses are moderated before posting and publication is at the absolute discretion of BMJ, however they are not peer-reviewed
  • Once published, you will not have the right to remove or edit your response. Removal or editing of responses is at BMJ's absolute discretion
  • If patients could recognise themselves, or anyone else could recognise a patient from your description, please obtain the patient's written consent to publication and send them to the editorial office before submitting your response [Patient consent forms]
  • By submitting this response you are agreeing to our full [Response terms and requirements]

Vertical Tabs

Other responses

Jump to comment:

  • Published on:
    Is Cochrane not in the archives?

    Dear Editor

    There is one reason why I was initally interested to read the systematic review of intravenous immunoglobulin in haemolytic diseases of the newborn [1] and then concerned by the published responses.

    Neither the authors of the systematic review published in Archives nor the respondents to that article cited or discussed the 2002 Cochrane systematic review on exactly the same neonatal topic...

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.
  • Published on:
    Reply to Ovaly and Cleary

    Dear Editor

    We are grateful to our colleagues for their interest and responses to our paper.[1] In response to Dr Ovaly’s comments we agree that late anaemia can be a problem in these babies who receive intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG), as also demonstrated in our systematic review. Even when infants have received exchange transfusions (XTs) top-up red cell transfusions may be required. In a recent local audit of XTs, 3...

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.
  • Published on:
    Systematic review of intravenous immunoglobulin in haemolytic disease of the newborn.
    • Andrew G Cleary, Paediatric Rheumatologist
    • Other Contributors:
      • Brian Brown, Jenny Minards, John Sills, Paula Bolton-Maggs

    Dear Editor

    We read with interest the recent review of Gottstein and Cooke.[1]

    Their systematic review of trials reporting treatment of infants with proven Rh and/or ABO haemolytic disease of the newborn (HDN) treated with high dose intravenous immunoglobulin (HDIVIG) and phototherapy with phototherapy alone demonstrated that significantly fewer infants required exchange transfusion in the HDIVIG group. The...

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.
  • Published on:
    Late anemia in Rh hemolytic disease

    Dear Editor

    As it is clearly stated in the review by Gottstein and Cooke,[1] we consider it unethical to withhold or delay high dose intravenous immunglobulin (IVIG) treatment in infants with haemolytic disease of the newborn. Since the study we have done in 1995,[2] we have treated 129 patients with Coombs positive hemolytic disease of the newborn, with the same method and had to resort to exchange transfusio...

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.
  • Published on:
    High dose IVIG in hemolytic disease of neonates

    Dear Editor

    It has been encouraging to read article of Gottstein et al.[1] on use of high dose Intravenous Immunoglobulin (HDIVIG), in case of hemolytic disease of newborns (HDN) & the conclusion showing effectiveness of HDIVIG. I have following observations to make with respect to implication to practice & future research. All the references mentioned [2-6] were 3-10 years old. These trials have n...

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.
  • Published on:
    IV immunoglobulin in haemolytic disaese of the newborn

    Dear Editor

    The systematic review of intravenous immunoglobulin (ivIgG) in haemolytic disease of the newborn (HDN) by Gottstein and Cooke[1] raises some interesting points. The first fascinating observation is just how tiny is the number of babes, worldwide, entered into published randomised (or quasi-randomised) studies suitable for this sort of systematic review.

    I too was struck by the apparently un...

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.