Search

Background and Study Aims: To evaluate the effects of enteral administration of recombinant human erythropoietin (rhEPO) on feeding-related complications in preterm infants., Patients and Methods: This double-blind, randomized controlled pilot study enrolled 120 preterm infants born ≤ 32 weeks' gestation who were admitted to the neonatal intensive care unit in a tertiary hospital; 60 patients randomly received recombinant human erythropoietin while the other 60 received placebo. Newborns who underwent cardiopulmonary resuscitation, infants with genetic syndromes, infants with inborn errors of metabolism, infants with major congenital or acquired gastrointestinal tract malformations, infants with previous use of parenteral growth factors such as recombinant human erythropoietin and granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimuating factor (GM-CSF) and infants previously treated with intravenous immunoglobulin were excluded. Overall, 48 patients withdrew from the study because of intravenous haematopoietic growth factor intake or death before treatment was completed. A total of 72 preterm infants remained in the study: 36 preterm infants in the erythropoietin (EPO) group, and 36 preterm infants in the placebo group. The day that enteral feeding was successfully started, the time to establishing one-half, two-thirds, and full enteral feedings (reaching at least 150 mL/kg/day), the number of episodes of feeding intolerance, the time to regain birth weight and the incidence of necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC) were recorded., Results: Both groups showed no significant difference in the time to achieve one-half, two-thirds, or full enteral feeding, no signs of feeding intolerance, and no cases of NEC were recorded., Conclusion: Enteral erythropoietin does not appear to affect feeding intolerance or NEC incidence., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2020 Pan-Arab Association of Gastroenterology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Delayed chest closure is commonly used for cardiac surgery. However, insufficient data exist to guide its management in immunosuppressed lung transplantation patients, with unclear long-term consequences., Methods: We performed 769 lung transplantations between January 2009 and January 2016. Of these, 47 (6%) required delayed chest closure because of coagulopathy, respiratory intolerance, and hemodynamic instability. On multivariable analysis, risk factors for delayed chest closure included double-lung transplantation and longer ischemic times. To account for differences between the 2 groups, we performed propensity matching, generating 46 well-matched pairs., Results: Among matched patients with appropriate antimicrobial prophylaxis, we found no difference in 30-day prevalence of pneumonia, empyema, Clostridium difficile, bloodstream, and deep wound infections. There was also no difference in 6-month composite infections. However, delayed chest closure patients received more transfusions within 5 days of transplantation (median, 7 vs 3 units; P < .001), had more intubations > 5 days (80% vs 41%, P < .001), had more severe primary graft dysfunction (39% vs 17%, P = .044), had a longer hospital stay (median, 61 vs 25 days; P < .001), and had worse pulmonary function tests 6 years after transplant (P = .019). Fortunately, estimated survival at 6 months, 1 year, and 5 years between delayed and primary chest closure groups was similar (82%, 76%, and 39% vs 84%, 75%, and 50%, respectively; P = .23)., Conclusions: Use of delayed chest closure does not yield more infections or worse long-term survival. However it may be associated with increased in-hospital morbidities and worse long-term pulmonary function., (Copyright © 2020 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)