Systematic review assesses prognostic value of near-infrared spectroscopy monitoring in children with congenital heart disease, highlighting risks of brain injury and acute kidney injury.
Objective: Pediatric patients with congenital heart disease (CHD) are at risk of non-cardiac complications that impact outcome. Early prognostication is necessary to tailor treatment and improve parent counseling. This systematic review assessed the prognostic value of perioperative near-infrared spectroscopy (NIRS) monitoring of regional oxygen saturation (rSO₂) with regard to brain injury, brain development, neurodevelopment, acute kidney injury (AKI), and necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC) in pediatric CHD patients. Data Sources: PubMed and Embase databases. Study Selection: We searched for original research articles published up to 2023 describing children (younger than 18 yr) with CHD using perioperative rSO₂ monitoring, and reporting their association with at least one of the following outcomes: AKI, NEC, brain injury, brain development, or neurodevelopment. Data Extraction: Ten studies, including a total of 562 patients, were included for brain injury, 4 studies with 229 patients for brain development, 15 studies with 1024 patients for neurodevelopment, 15 studies with 1168 patients for AKI, and 3 studies including 250 patients for NEC. The majority of the studies had a moderate to high risk of bias as assessed by the Cochrane Quality in Prognosis Studies tool. High heterogeneity in study populations and NIRS measurements was found. Data Synthesis: Of the studies we identified, 5 of 10 in brain injury, 3 of 4 in brain development, 10 of 15 in neurodevelopment, 9 of 15 in AKI, and 1 of 3 in NEC reported associations with rSO₂. No meta-analysis could be performed due to heterogeneity. Conclusions: Our findings highlight the need to improve methodological quality and reduce intra- and interstudy heterogeneity. Several methodological recommendations to improve future research were formulated.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bosch et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: