Efficacy and Safety of Anti-D Immunoglobulins versus Intravenous Immunoglobulins for Immune Thrombocytopenia in Children: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

To compare the efficacy and safety of intravenous immunoglobulins (IVIG) and anti-D immunoglobulin (anti-D) in pediatric immune thrombocytopenia (ITP). We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis following PRISMA guidelines, including all randomized controlled trials that have assessed the efficacy and safety of anti-D and IVIG in children with ITP. We searched Medline, Embase, and Cochrane databases. Primary outcomes were the proportion of children achieving platelet count responses as defined in each study and bleeding response. Other safety outcomes included infusion reactions and hemolysis. Eleven studies with 558 children were included. Anti-D was significantly inferior to IVIG at increasing platelet counts, both for thresholds of >20 × 109/L at 24-72 hours (response rate ratio for anti-D vs IVIG: 0.85, 95% CI 0.78-0.94) and >50 × 109/L at 24-72 hours (response rate ratio for anti-D vs IVIG: 0.75, 95% CI 0.61-0.92). Bleeding response was assessed in 4 studies, but some heterogeneity in reporting leads to unclear conclusion. General symptoms after anti-D infusion were less frequent than after IVIG (Peto OR 0.39, 95% CI 0.25-0.62). Hemolysis was more frequent after anti-D. The overall quality of the studies was low. Compared with anti-D, IVIG led to a better response in terms of platelet count and may be preferred as a first-line treatment of ITP in children with acute hemorrhagic symptoms. However, the clinical significance of IVIG superiority on platelet count remains unclear.