Keywords
retinopathy of prematurity - early-onset sepsis - prematurity - meta-analysis
Retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) is a multifactorial retinal disorder affecting 10
to 25% of neonates born under 32 weeks of gestation and continues to be the leading
cause of visual impairment and childhood blindness worldwide.[1]
[2] Even though the majority of ROP cases are mild and usually self-limiting, advances
in neonatal care and lowering the age limit of neonatal intensive care treatment have
led to increased survival of extremely premature infants at risk of (severe) ROP.[3]
[4] Hence, accurate screening and timely detection and treatment of ROP are crucial
in preventing progression to severe visual impairment and blindness.
Neonatal sepsis is an independent risk factor for ROP and is therefore included in
the Dutch ROP screening criteria.[5]
[6] The mechanism behind this association is believed to be due to cytokine and angiogenesis
factor production.[7]
[8] Sepsis releases inflammatory mediators that increase hypoxia-inducible factor (HIF-1α)
concentrations, which may exacerbate phase II of ROP.[9]
[10] Additionally, sepsis induces an oxidative stress response that elevates vascular
endothelial growth factor-2 (VEGF-2) levels, which may also initiate phase II of ROP.[11]
[12] Furthermore, perinatal infection can lead to decreased insulin-like growth factor-1
(IGF-1) levels, which promotes phase I of ROP.[13]
The onset of sepsis may be a valuable tool in understanding the pathophysiology behind
the first phase of ROP. Early-onset sepsis (EOS) is acquired through vertical transmission
in the first 72 hours of life, while late-onset sepsis (LOS) is acquired through hospital
and community environmental microorganisms beyond the first 72 hours of life and occurs
more often.[14]
[15] Since studies have shown that placental inflammation/infection through vertical
transmission leads to an increased risk of ROP, it may be beneficial to investigate
the independent effect of EOS on ROP.[16]
[17]
To date, meta-analyses on the association between sepsis and ROP have predominately
focused on LOS and not on EOS. Extra awareness for ROP risk factors shortly after
birth can provide the opportunity to tailor neonatal treatment decisions in phase
I of ROP well before the first ROP screening is performed. Hence, we performed a systematic
review and meta-analysis to investigate the association between EOS and the risk of
ROP development to fill in the knowledge gap and potentially identify high-risk infants
in an earlier stage.
Materials and Methods
Sources
This systematic review was conducted according to PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items
for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses) guidelines and is registered in PROSPERO
(identifier: CRD42022380411; [Supplementary Material S1] [available in the online version]).[18] The online electronic databases PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library were searched
up until February 2024 using combinations of the following keywords: “Placenta,” “Sepsis,”
“Risk Factors,” AND “Retinopathy of Prematurity.” Additionally, various synonyms were
added as Medical Subject Headings (MESH) terms and free-text words.
Study Selection
Eligibility was assessed through title and abstract screening with subsequent full-text
evaluation when included. Studies were eligible for inclusion when (unadjusted) data
were reported on the association between EOS and ROP. Studies were excluded when no
distinction was made between EOS and LOS and when EOS was diagnosed based on clinical
symptoms alone. Further exclusion criteria were case reports, case series, reviews,
editorials, unavailable full text, animal studies, and when the study population consisted
entirely of multiple pregnancies due to its confounding effect.[19] Eligibility was independently identified by three reviewers (S.E., L.E.M., and N.E.S-D.)
and discrepancies were resolved through discussion.
The primary outcomes were any stage ROP and severe ROP (i.e., ≥stage 3, type I, aggressive
[posterior] ROP, plus disease or requiring treatment). Due to their known potential
confounding effect on ROP, the following clinical data were explored: gestational
age (GA) at birth (weeks), birth weight (BW; g), small for gestational age (SGA; BW
<10th centile), maternal steroid use, necrotizing enterocolitis (any stage), LOS (suspected/proven),
and mechanical ventilation (days).[5] Proven EOS was defined as positive blood or cerebrospinal fluid culture in the first
72 hours after birth.[20] Neonates with EOS were compared with neonates without EOS for both any stage and
severe ROP. Potential confounders were compared between any stage ROP and no ROP,
and between severe ROP and no/mild ROP.
Quality Assessment
The quality assessment was performed using the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale for case–control
and cohort studies.[21] Three study aspects were assessed: selection (0–4 points), comparability (0–2 points),
and exposure/outcome (0–3 points). Scoring was based on the association between EOS
and ROP as the primary outcome and comparability scoring was based on adjustment for
GA and an additional potential confounder reported in our study.
Statistical Analysis
Statistical analyses were performed using RStudio, version 4.2.1 (RStudio, PBC, Boston,
MA) with the metafor package and were assisted by a statistician (J.J.G).[22] Data are presented using n/N (%) and odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI). Reported unadjusted 2 × 2
table data were used to recalculate ORs and 95% CIs per study. These data were combined
by using logistic random-effects models due to anticipated heterogeneity. Q-statistics
were calculated to evaluate heterogeneity between studies, and I
2-statistics were calculated to observe total variation between studies due to heterogeneity
beyond chance. p-Values <0.05 were determined as statistically significant. Publication bias was estimated
through funnel plots, failsafe numbers, and trim-and-fill functions.
To explain observed heterogeneity, the mean/median difference for continuous variables
and incidence (%) difference for dichotomous variables were calculated between any
stage and no ROP, and severe and no/mild ROP. To include more studies (N) in the meta-regression analysis, no distinction was made between median and mean
for continuous variables. Univariate meta-regression models were performed to identify
variables that potentially influence the effect size of proven EOS on ROP. The Bonferroni
correction for multiple comparisons was used to account for multiple testing, in which
a p-value of 0.05/number of included variables was considered statistically significant.
Subsequently, multivariate meta-regression analysis was performed using significant
variables found in univariate analysis. Since GA and BW are highly correlated and
adjusting for both variables in multivariate analysis will cause multicollinearity,
only one variable should be included in multivariate analysis when both variables
are significant, preferably with SGA. Data are presented using β-coefficient with
95% CI, which signifies a higher association between proven EOS and ROP in studies
with large between-group differences in potential confounders when positive and lower
when negative.
Results
The search strategy yielded 9,722 articles. After excluding duplicates, 6,192 titles
and abstracts were screened. A total of 5,821 articles were excluded after a primary
assessment based on inclusion and exclusion criteria. After a full-text assessment
of the remaining 371 articles, 17 studies were included ([Fig. 1]).
Fig. 1 PRISMA flowchart of study inclusion. EOS, early-onset sepsis; LOS, late-onset sepsis.
PRISMA, Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses.
Quality Analysis
Quality assessment is shown in [Table 1]. Ten studies were categorized as high quality (8–9 points), while the remaining
seven studies received moderate quality scores (6–7 points). Points were mainly lost
due to the absence of confounder adjustment or the presence of multicollinearity due
to adjusting for both GA and BW. The revisited International Classification of ROP
was used for ROP classification in all included studies.[23]
Table 1
Quality assessment of included studies
First author (y)
|
Selection (max 4 points)
|
Comparability (max 2 points)
|
Outcome (max 3 points)
|
Klinger, 2010[34]
|
4
|
2
|
3
|
Chen, 2011[24]
|
4
|
1
|
3
|
Silveira, 2011[25]
|
4
|
0
|
3
|
Jimenez, 2012[26]
|
4
|
1
|
3
|
Mularoni, 2014[35]
|
4
|
1
|
2
|
Fonseca, 2018[27]
|
4
|
2
|
3
|
Goldstein, 2019[36]
|
4
|
1
|
3
|
Jiang, 2019[28]
|
4
|
1
|
3
|
Celik, 2021[37]
|
4
|
0
|
3
|
Nordberg, 2021[29]
|
4
|
0
|
3
|
Abdel Salam Gomaa, 2021[38]
|
4
|
0
|
3
|
Carranza-Mendizabal, 2021[30]
|
4
|
1
|
3
|
Bonafiglia, 2022[31]
|
4
|
1
|
3
|
Gudu, 2022[32]
|
4
|
0
|
3
|
Duggan, 2023[39]
|
4
|
2
|
3
|
Dincer, 2023[40]
|
4
|
0
|
3
|
Boo, 2024[33]
|
4
|
2
|
3
|
Early-Onset Sepsis and Any Stage Retinopathy of Prematurity
Ten studies assessed the presence of proven EOS in neonates with any stage ROP compared
with neonates without ROP, with sample sizes ranging from 74 to 14,008 ([Supplementary Table S1] [available in the online version]).[24]
[25]
[26]
[27]
[28]
[29]
[30]
[31]
[32]
[33]
Proven EOS showed no association with any stage ROP (OR = 1.90; 95% CI: 0.96–3.79,
p = 0.0665; [Fig. 2]). Significantly high heterogeneity was observed (Q = 55.2, I
2 = 83.7%, p <0.0001). Neither visual inspection and trim-and-fill number (n = 0) of the funnel plot, nor the failsafe number (n = 77, Kendall'sτ = − 0.02, p = 1.0) showed indication of publication bias ([Supplementary Fig. S1] [available in the online version]).
Fig. 2 Forest plot of the association between proven EOS and any stage ROP. Heterogeneity:
Q = 55.2; I
2 = 83.7%; p < 0.0001. 95% CI, 95% confidence interval; EOS, early-onset sepsis; ROP, retinopathy
of prematurity.
Secondary analyses were performed to explore the found heterogeneity. Univariate meta-regression
analysis was used to analyze the possible influence of these variables as moderators
on the effect size of proven EOS on any stage ROP ([Table 2]). Two factors were found to be significant moderators (number of studies: 3–8):
GA difference (β-coefficient = 1.5; 95% CI: 0.6–2.3, p = 0.0005) and mechanical ventilation duration difference (β-coefficient −0.4; 95%
CI: −0.6 to −0.2, p = 0.0002) between any stage ROP group and no ROP group. Multivariate meta-regression
analysis was not possible due to a low number of studies reporting both GA difference
and mechanical ventilation duration difference (N < 4).
Table 2
Meta-regression regarding the influence of potential confounders on early-onset sepsis
and any stage retinopathy of prematurity
Univariate
|
N
|
Estimate
|
SE
|
Z-value
|
p-Value
|
CI lower
|
CI higher
|
R
2 (%)
|
I
2 (%)
|
Gestational age at birth
|
7
|
1.4519
|
0.4199
|
3.4577
|
0.0005
|
0.6289
|
2.2749
|
84.99
|
42.21
|
Birth weight
|
7
|
0.0069
|
0.0076
|
0.9085
|
0.3636
|
−0.0080
|
0.0218
|
0.00
|
86.29
|
Small for gestational age
|
3
|
0.1313
|
0.0780
|
1.6834
|
0.0923
|
−0.0216
|
0.02841
|
100.00
|
0.00
|
Maternal steroids
|
7
|
0.0236
|
0.0418
|
0.5646
|
0.5723
|
−0.0583
|
0.1054
|
22.02
|
81.53
|
Necrotizing enterocolitis
|
7
|
−0.1196
|
0.0772
|
−1.5494
|
0.1213
|
−0.2708
|
0.0317
|
8.11
|
83.76
|
Late-onset sepsis
|
8
|
−0.0403
|
0.0306
|
−1.3179
|
0.1875
|
−0.1002
|
0.0196
|
0.00
|
84.27
|
Mechanical ventilation
|
3
|
−0.3959
|
0.1046
|
−3.7854
|
0.0002
|
−0.6009
|
−0.1909
|
100.00
|
0.00
|
Abbreviation: CI, confidence interval.
Early-Onset Sepsis and Severe Retinopathy of Prematurity
Eleven studies assessed the presence of proven EOS in neonates with severe ROP compared
with neonates with no/mild ROP, with sample sizes ranging from 46 to 43,178 ([Supplementary Table S2] [available in the online version]).[25]
[27]
[28]
[29]
[34]
[35]
[36]
[37]
[38]
[39]
[40] Proven EOS was detected twice as frequently in neonates with severe ROP compared
with neonates with no/mild ROP (OR = 2.21; 95% CI: 1.68–2.90, p < 0.0001; [Fig. 3]). Moderate heterogeneity was observed (Q = 14.8, I
2 = 32.4%, p = 0.1). Neither visual inspection and trim-and-fill number (n = 1) of the funnel plot, nor the failsafe number (n = 191, Kendall's τ = 0.02, p = 1.0) showed indication of publication bias ([Supplementary Fig. S2] [available in the online version]).
Fig. 3 Forest plot of the association between proven EOS and severe ROP. Heterogeneity:
Q = 14.8; I
2 = 32.4%; p = 0.1395. 95% CI, 95% confidence interval; EOS, early-onset sepsis; ROP, retinopathy
of prematurity.
In univariate meta-regression analysis ([Table 3]), no factors were found to be significant moderators for the association between
proven EOS and severe ROP (number of studies: 3–6).
Table 3
Meta-regression regarding the influence of potential confounders on early-onset sepsis
and severe retinopathy of prematurity
Univariate
|
N
|
Estimate
|
SE
|
Z-value
|
p-Value
|
CI lower
|
CI higher
|
R
2 (%)
|
I
2 (%)
|
Gestational age at birth
|
6
|
0.0193
|
0.1427
|
0.1351
|
0.8925
|
-0.2605
|
0.2990
|
0.00
|
0.00
|
Birth weight
|
6
|
−0.0001
|
0.0011
|
−0.0664
|
0.9470
|
−0.0023
|
0.0021
|
0.00
|
0.00
|
Small for gestational age
|
3
|
0.0040
|
0.0131
|
0.3059
|
0.7597
|
−0.0216
|
0.0216
|
0.00
|
0.00
|
Maternal steroids
|
4
|
0.0202
|
0.0332
|
0.6089
|
0.5426
|
−0.0448
|
0.0853
|
0.00
|
0.00
|
Necrotizing enterocolitis
|
5
|
−0.0248
|
0.0521
|
−0.4751
|
0.6347
|
−0.1269
|
0.0774
|
0.00
|
0.00
|
Late-onset sepsis
|
5
|
−0.0194
|
0.0315
|
−0.6155
|
0.5383
|
−0.0812
|
0.0424
|
0.00
|
0.00
|
Mechanical ventilation
|
3
|
−0.0128
|
0.0231
|
−0.5568
|
0.5776
|
−0.0580
|
0.0323
|
0.00
|
0.00
|
Abbreviation: CI, confidence interval.
Discussion
This is the first meta-analysis investigating the effect of EOS on ROP, which shows
that neonates with EOS have a 2.2-fold increased risk of severe ROP. These findings
are based on neonates with proven EOS (i.e., positive blood or cerebrospinal fluid
culture), which ensured high validity and robust evidence. Furthermore, no significant
heterogeneity was observed between studies, and no significant confounders influencing
this effect size were found in meta-regression analysis.
The underlying pathophysiological mechanism behind the increased ROP risk in neonates
with EOS is yet to be resolved but is believed to be due to the stimulating effect
of EOS on inflammatory mediators.[41] Perinatal infection leads to decreased IGF-1 levels, which promotes phase I of ROP.[12]
[13]
[42] Proinflammatory cytokines such as interleukin-1β and tumor necrosis factor-α increase
HIF-1α levels.[9] The HIF-1α pathway regulates VEGF-2 production and increased HIF-1α levels may,
therefore, exacerbate phase II of ROP.[43] Furthermore, severe ROP has been found to be related to increased cytokine levels
in the first 72 hours of life.[44]
[45]
These pathophysiological pathways are similar in neonates with histological chorioamnionitis,
which is an acute maternal inflammatory response in the placental membranes mainly
due to ascending microorganisms.[46]
[47] This maternal response can be accompanied by funisitis, which is the fetal inflammatory
response in the umbilical cord vessels. Our previous meta-analysis has shown that
neonates with placental inflammation have an increased risk for ROP and that this
risk is greater when inflammation is present in the umbilical cord (funisitis).[16] EOS is also acquired through vertical transmission and can develop intrauterine
as a consequence of placental inflammation.
Besides placental inflammation, LOS has also been found to increase the risk of ROP.[48]
[49] LOS is hospital- and community-acquired beyond the first 72 hours of life and can
induce an oxidative stress response, which promotes vascular endothelial cell proliferation
and migration through VEGF-2.[11] Elevated VEGF-2 levels, in response to hypoxia, cause neovascular proliferation
and may therefore initiate phase II of ROP.[12] In our meta-regression analysis, LOS did not appear to influence the effect size
between EOS and severe ROP. Multiple hits of antenatal/postnatal inflammation have
been reported to increase the risk of ROP.[50]
[51] Remarkably, a recent review by Dammann and Stansfield has provided evidence that
neonatal sepsis is a causal initiator of ROP and that placental inflammation can be
considered a causal facilitator, which increases the likelihood of ROP.[52] Taken together, neonates with EOS have an increased risk of ROP and this risk is
intensified when other inflammatory morbidities are present.
A previous meta-analysis by Wang et al explored the association between sepsis and
ROP and also found that sepsis was significantly associated with severe ROP (OR = 2.3).[48] However, no distinction was made between EOS and LOS and most sepsis cases were
LOS. Additionally, only six studies were included in the analysis of severe ROP (defined
as ≥stage 3). Furthermore, extracted outcome data were based on adjusted ORs with
most studies controlling for both GA and BW, which may have introduced multicollinearity
and, thus, provided limited evidence.
Huang et al also performed a meta-analysis to identify the impact of EOS and LOS on
ROP and showed similar results for severe ROP (OR = 1.9).[49] Similar to our study, Huang et al showed in subgroup analysis that EOS was significantly
associated with severe ROP (OR = 2.5). However, it is important to note that Huang
et al only included two studies in this analysis, which is insufficient to draw conclusions.
Additionally, extracted outcome data were again based on adjusted ORs, and many studies
adjusted for both GA and BW in multivariate analysis. Our meta-analysis included a
relatively larger number of studies (n = 10 any stage ROP, n = 11 severe ROP) published between 2009 and 2024 and, thus, provides stronger evidence.
Instead of exploring the overall effect of suspected/proven EOS on ROP, our study
only investigated the independent effect of proven EOS on ROP to provide robust results.
Remarkably, studies have shown that over 95% of neonates treated with antibiotics
for suspected infection ultimately do not have sepsis.[14] Most studies do not distinguish between proven and suspected sepsis, even though
it leads to overestimating the effect of sepsis on ROP. Hence, diagnosing EOS based
on a positive blood or cerebrospinal fluid culture is more reliable and should be
implemented in future studies.
Limitations
The main limitation of this study was the retrospective designs of most included studies,
which may have resulted in information bias. Additionally, high heterogeneity was
present between included studies in the any stage ROP group, which may have affected
our results. Furthermore, data on potential confounders in neonates with EOS were
limited and hampered multivariate meta-regression analysis. Nevertheless, our meta-analysis
provides an extensive overview based on a relatively large number of studies and is
the first to explore the independent effect of proven EOS on ROP. Additionally, we
eliminated heterogeneity in confounder adjustment by calculating unadjusted ORs from
2 × 2 tables reported in the included studies.
Conclusion
In conclusion, this meta-analysis introduces proven EOS as an early risk factor for
severe ROP. Future studies should diagnose sepsis based on positive blood or cerebrospinal
fluid cultures and distinguish between proven EOS and LOS to provide reliable and
stronger evidence. Neonatologists need to be aware that EOS is an early predictor
of ROP that should be taken into account in neonatal policies and treatment decisions
well before ROP screening begins.