Routine Antenatal Anti-D Prophylaxis in Women Who Are Rh(D) Negative: Meta-Analyses Adjusted for Differences in Study Design and Quality

Background: To estimate the effectiveness of routine antenatal anti-D prophylaxis for preventing sensitisation in pregnant Rhesus negative women, and to explore whether this depends on the treatment regimen adopted. Methods: Ten studies identified in a previous systematic literature search were included. Potential sources of bias were systematically identified using bias checklists, and their impact and uncertainty were quantified using expert opinion. Study results were adjusted for biases and combined, first in a random-effects meta-analysis and then in a random-effects metaregression analysis. Results: In a conventional meta-analysis, the pooled odds ratio for sensitisation was estimated as 0.25 (95 % CI 0.18, 0.36), comparing routine antenatal anti-D prophylaxis to control, with some heterogeneity (I 2 = 19%). However, this naïve analysis ignores substantial differences in study quality and design. After adjusting for these, the pooled odds ratio for sensitisation was estimated as 0.31 (95 % CI 0.17, 0.56), with no evidence of heterogeneity (I 2 = 0%). A meta-regression analysis wa

A922 Sequential measurement of 1 hour creatinine clearance (1-CRCL) in critically ill patients at risk of acute kidney injury (AKI)

Meeting abstrac