Search

Objective: To determine the relationship between transient neonatal hypoglycemia in at-risk infants and neurocognitive function at 6-7 years of corrected age., Study Design: The pre-hPOD Study involved children born with at least 1 risk factor for neonatal hypoglycemia. Hypoglycemia was defined as ≥1 consecutive blood glucose concentrations <47 mg/dl (2.6 mmol/L), severe as <36 mg/dl (2.0 mmol/L), mild as 36 to <47 mg/dL (2.0 to <2.6 mmol/L), brief as 1-2 episodes, and recurrent as ≥3 episodes. At 6-7 years children were assessed for cognitive and motor function (NIH-Toolbox), learning, visual perception and behavior. The primary outcome was neurocognitive impairment, defined as >1 SD below the normative mean in ≥1 Toolbox tests. The 8 secondary outcomes covered children's cognitive, motor, language, emotional-behavioral, and visual perceptual development. Primary and secondary outcomes were compared between children who did and did not experience neonatal hypoglycemia, adjusting for potential confounding by gestation, birthweight, sex and receipt of prophylactic dextrose gel (pre-hPOD intervention). Secondary analysis included assessment by severity and frequency of hypoglycemia., Results: Of 392 eligible children, 315 (80%) were assessed at school age (primary outcome, n = 308); 47% experienced hypoglycemia. Neurocognitive impairment was similar between exposure groups (hypoglycemia 51% vs 50% no hypoglycemia; aRD -4%, 95% CI -15%, 7%). Children with severe or recurrent hypoglycemia had worse visual motion perception and increased risk of emotional-behavioral difficulty., Conclusion: Exposure to neonatal hypoglycemia was not associated with risk of neurocognitive impairment at school-age in at-risk infants, but severe and recurrent episodes may have adverse impacts., Trial Registration: Hypoglycemia Prevention in Newborns with Oral Dextrose: the Dosage Trial (pre-hPOD Study): ACTRN12613000322730., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors have no conflicts of interest relevant to this article to disclose. The pre-hPOD Study was funded by Lottery Health Research (241266), Cure Kids (3561), philanthropic donations to the University of Auckland Foundation (F-ILG- LRSR), Health Research Council of New Zealand (15-216), Gravida, National Centre for Growth and Development (SCH-14-14), Auckland Medical Research Foundation (1113012), A+ Trust (5696) and Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health & Human Development, National Institutes of Health (R01HD091075). The pre-hPOD Early School-age Outcomes Study was funded by the Health Research Council of New Zealand (19/960) and the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health & Human Development, National Institutes of Health (R01HD091075). The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To investigate the effect of different doses of prophylactic dextrose gel on neurocognitive function and health at 6-7 years., Design: Early school-age follow-up of the pre-hPOD (hypoglycaemia Prevention with Oral Dextrose) study., Setting: Schools and communities., Patients: Children born at ≥35 weeks with ≥1 risk factor for neonatal hypoglycaemia: maternal diabetes, small or large for gestational age, or late preterm., Interventions: Four interventions commencing at 1 hour of age: dextrose gel (40%) 200 mg/kg; 400 mg/kg; 200 mg/kg and 200 mg/kg repeated before three feeds (800 mg/kg); 400 mg/kg and 200 mg/kg before three feeds (1000 mg/kg); compared with equivolume placebo (combined for analysis)., Main Outcomes Measures: Toolbox cognitive and motor batteries, as well as tests of motion perception, numeracy and cardiometabolic health, were used. The primary outcome was neurocognitive impairment, defined as a standard score of more than 1 SD below the age-corrected mean on one or more Toolbox tests., Findings: Of 392 eligible children, 309 were assessed for the primary outcome. There were no significant differences in the rate of neurocognitive impairment between those randomised to placebo (56%) and dextrose gel (200 mg/kg 46%: adjusted risk difference (aRD)=-14%, 95% CI -35%, 7%; 400 mg/kg 48%: aRD=-7%, 95% CI -27%, 12%; 800 mg/kg 45%: aRD=-14%, 95% CI -36%, 9%; 1000 mg/kg 50%: aRD=-8%, 95% CI -29%, 13%). Children exposed to any dose of dextrose gel (combined), compared with placebo, had a lower risk of motor impairment (3% vs 14%, aRD=-11%, 95% CI -19%, -3%) and higher mean (SD) cognitive scores (106.0 (15.3) vs 101.1 (15.7), adjusted mean difference=5.4, 95% CI 1.8, 8.9)., Conclusions: Prophylactic neonatal dextrose gel did not alter neurocognitive impairment at early school age but may have motor and cognitive benefits. Further school-age follow-up studies are needed., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Neonatal hypoglycaemia is the most common metabolic disorder in infants, and may be influenced by maternal glycaemic control. This systematic review evaluated the effect of intrapartum maternal glycaemic control on neonatal hypoglycaemia., Methods: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs, non-randomised studies of interventions, and cohort or case-control studies that examined interventions affecting intrapartum maternal glycaemic control compared to no or less stringent control. We searched four databases and three trial registries to November 2023. Quality assessments used Cochrane Risk of Bias 1 or the Effective Public Health Practice Project Quality Assessment Tool. Certainty of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE). Meta-analysis was performed using random-effects models analysed separately for women with or without diabetes. The review was registered prospectively on PROSPERO (CRD42022364876)., Results: We included 46 studies of women with diabetes and five studies of women without diabetes: one RCT, 32 cohort and 18 case-control studies (11,273 participants). For women with diabetes, the RCT showed little to no difference in the incidence of neonatal hypoglycaemia between tight versus less tight intrapartum glycaemic control groups (76 infants, RR 1.00 (0.45, 2.24), p = 1.00, low certainty evidence). However, 11 cohort studies showed tight intrapartum glycaemic control may reduce neonatal hypoglycaemia (6,152 infants, OR 0.44 (0.31, 0.63), p < 0.00001, I 2  = 58%, very low certainty evidence). For women without diabetes, there was insufficient evidence to determine the effect of tight intrapartum glycaemic control on neonatal hypoglycaemia., Conclusions: Very uncertain evidence suggests that tight intrapartum glycaemic control may reduce neonatal hypoglycaemia in infants of women with diabetes. High-quality RCTs are required., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Importance: Neonatal hypoglycemia is an important preventable cause of neurodevelopmental impairment, but there is a paucity of evidence to guide treatment., Objective: To evaluate whether early, low-dose oral diazoxide for severe or recurrent neonatal hypoglycemia reduces time to resolution of hypoglycemia., Design, Setting, and Participants: This 2-arm, placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial was conducted from May 2020 to February 2023 in tertiary neonatal units at 2 New Zealand hospitals. Participants were neonates born at 35 or more weeks' gestation and less than 1 week of age with severe hypoglycemia (blood glucose concentration <22 mg/dL or <36 mg/dL despite 2 doses of dextrose gel) or recurrent hypoglycemia (≥3 episodes of a blood glucose concentration <47 mg/dL within 48 hours)., Interventions: Newborns were randomized 1:1 to receive diazoxide suspension (loading dose, 5 mg/kg; maintenance, 1.5 mg/kg every 12 hours) or placebo, titrated per protocol., Main Outcome and Measures: The primary outcome was time to resolution of hypoglycemia, defined as enteral bolus feeding without intravenous fluids and normoglycemia (blood glucose concentration of 47-98 mg/dL) for at least 24 hours, compared between groups using adjusted Cox proportional hazards regression. Hazard ratios adjusted for stratification variables and gestation length are reported. Prespecified secondary outcomes, including number of blood glucose tests and episodes of hypoglycemia, duration of hypoglycemia, and time to enteral bolus feeding and weaning from intravenous fluids, were compared by generalized linear models. Newborns were followed up for at least 2 weeks., Results: Of 154 newborns screened, 75 were randomized and 74 with evaluable data were included in the analysis (mean [SD] gestational age for the full cohort, 37.6 [1.6] weeks), 36 in the diazoxide group and 38 in the placebo group. Baseline characteristics were similar: in the diazoxide group, mean (SD) gestational age was 37.9 (1.6) weeks and 26 (72%) were male; in the placebo group, mean (SD) gestational age was 37.4 (1.5) weeks and 27 (71%) were male. There was no significant difference in time to resolution of hypoglycemia (adjusted hazard ratio [AHR], 1.39; 95% CI, 0.84-2.23), possibly due to increased episodes of elevated blood glucose concentration and longer time to normoglycemia in the diazoxide group. Resolution of hypoglycemia, when redefined post hoc as enteral bolus feeding without intravenous fluids for at least 24 hours with no further hypoglycemia, was reached by more newborns in the diazoxide group (AHR, 2.60; 95% CI, 1.53-4.46). Newborns in the diazoxide group had fewer blood glucose tests (adjusted count ratio [ACR], 0.63; 95% CI, 0.56-0.71) and episodes of hypoglycemia (ACR, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.17-0.63), reduced duration of hypoglycemia (adjusted ratio of geometric means [ARGM], 0.18; 95% CI, 0.06-0.53), and reduced time to enteral bolus feeding (ARGM, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.58-0.95) and weaning from intravenous fluids (ARGM, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.60-0.87). Only 2 newborns (6%) treated with diazoxide had hypoglycemia after the loading dose compared with 20 (53%) with placebo., Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial, early treatment of severe or recurrent neonatal hypoglycemia with low-dose oral diazoxide did not reduce time to resolution of hypoglycemia but reduced time to enteral bolus feeding and weaning from intravenous fluids, duration of hypoglycemia, and frequency of blood glucose testing compared with placebo., Trial Registration: ANZCTR.org.au Identifier: ACTRN12620000129987.

Background: Placental management strategies such as umbilical cord milking and delayed cord clamping may provide a range of benefits for the newborn. The aim of this review was to assess the effectiveness of umbilical cord milking and delayed cord clamping for the prevention of neonatal hypoglycaemia., Methods: Three databases and five clinical trial registries were systematically reviewed to identify randomised controlled trials comparing umbilical cord milking or delayed cord clamping with control in term and preterm infants. The primary outcome was neonatal hypoglycaemia (study defined). Two independent reviewers conducted screening, data extraction and quality assessment. Quality of the included studies was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool (RoB-2). Certainty of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. Meta-analysis using a random effect model was done using Review Manager 5.4. The review was registered prospectively on PROSPERO (CRD42022356553)., Results: Data from 71 studies and 14 268 infants were included in this review; 22 (2 537 infants) compared umbilical cord milking with control, and 50 studies (11 731 infants) compared delayed with early cord clamping. For umbilical cord milking there were no data on neonatal hypoglycaemia, and no differences between groups for any of the secondary outcomes. We found no evidence that delayed cord clamping reduced the incidence of hypoglycaemia (6 studies, 444 infants, RR = 0.87, CI: 0.58 to 1.30, p = 0.49, I 2  = 0%). Delayed cord clamping was associated with a 27% reduction in neonatal mortality (15 studies, 3 041 infants, RR = 0.73, CI: 0.55 to 0.98, p = 0.03, I 2  = 0%). We found no evidence for the effect of delayed cord clamping for any of the other outcomes. The certainty of evidence was low for all outcomes., Conclusion: We found no data for the effectiveness of umbilical cord milking on neonatal hypoglycaemia, and no evidence that delayed cord clamping reduced the incidence of hypoglycaemia, but the certainty of the evidence was low., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Poor feeding, among other factors, predisposes neonates to hypoglycaemia. Early feeding is widely recommended to prevent hypoglycaemia in those at risk, but the effectiveness of this is uncertain. This review aimed to summarise and analyse the evidence on the effectiveness of early feeding for prevention of neonatal hypoglycaemia., Methods: Four databases and three clinical trial registries were searched from inception to May 24, 2023. Published and unpublished randomised controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs, cluster randomised trials, non-randomised studies of interventions, and observational studies with comparison groups were considered for inclusion with no language or publication date restrictions. We included studies of neonates who were fed early (within 60 min of birth or study defined) versus delayed. Study quality was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 1 tool or Effective Public Health Practice Project Quality Assessment tool. Certainty of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. RevMan 5.4.1 or R was used to synthesise results in random-effects meta-analyses. This review was registered prospectively with PROSPERO (CRD42022378904)., Results: A total of 175,392 participants were included across 19 studies, of which two were RCTs, 14 cohort studies, two cross-sectional studies, and one a case-control study. Most studies (13/19) were conducted in low- or lower-middle-income countries. Early feeding may be associated with reduced neonatal hypoglycaemia (four cohort studies, 744 infants, odds ratio [OR] 0.19 (95% CI: 0.10-0.35), p &lt; 0.00001, I2 = 44%) and slightly reduced duration of initial hospital stay (one cohort study, 1,673 infants, mean difference: -0.20 days [95% CI: -0.31 to -0.09], p = 0.0003), but the evidence is very uncertain. One RCT found early feeding had little or no effect on the risk of neonatal mortality, but three cohort studies found early feeding may be associated with reduced risk (136,468 infants, OR 0.51 [95% CI: 0.37-0.72]; low certainty evidence; p &lt;0.0001; I2 = 54%)., Conclusion: We found that early feeding may reduce the incidence of neonatal hypoglycaemia, but the evidence is very uncertain. Given its many other benefits, early feeding should continue to be recommended. This review was primarily funded by the Aotearoa Foundation and the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) of the National Institutes of Health., (© 2024 The Author(s). Published by S. Karger AG, Basel.)

Background: Neonatal hypoglycaemia is a common condition that can be associated with brain injury. Current practice usually includes early identification of at-risk infants (e.g. infants of diabetic mothers; preterm, small- or large-for-gestational-age infants), and prophylactic measures are advised. However, these measures often involve use of formula milk or admission to the neonatal unit. Dextrose gel is non-invasive, inexpensive and effective for treatment of neonatal hypoglycaemia. Prophylactic dextrose gel can reduce the incidence of neonatal hypoglycaemia, thus potentially reducing separation of mother and baby and supporting breastfeeding, as well as preventing brain injury. This is an update of a previous Cochrane Review published in 2021., Objectives: To assess the effectiveness and safety of oral dextrose gel in preventing hypoglycaemia before first hospital discharge and reducing long-term neurodevelopmental impairment in newborn infants at risk of hypoglycaemia., Search Methods: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and Epistemonikos in April 2023. We also searched clinical trials databases and the reference lists of retrieved articles., Selection Criteria: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs comparing oral dextrose gel versus placebo, no intervention, or other therapies for the prevention of neonatal hypoglycaemia. We included newborn infants at risk of hypoglycaemia, including infants of mothers with diabetes (all types), high or low birthweight, and born preterm (< 37 weeks), age from birth to 24 hours, who had not yet been diagnosed with hypoglycaemia., Data Collection and Analysis: Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed the risk of bias. We contacted investigators to obtain additional information. We used fixed-effect meta-analyses. We used the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of evidence., Main Results: We included two studies conducted in high-income countries comparing oral dextrose gel versus placebo in 2548 infants at risk of neonatal hypoglycaemia. Both of these studies were included in the previous version of this review, but new follow-up data were available for both. We judged these two studies to be at low risk of bias in 13/14 domains, and that the evidence for most outcomes was of moderate certainty. Meta-analysis of the two studies showed that oral dextrose gel reduces the risk of hypoglycaemia (risk ratio (RR) 0.87, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.79 to 0.95; risk difference (RD) -0.06, 95% CI -0.10 to -0.02; 2548 infants; high-certainty evidence). Evidence from two studies showed that there may be little to no difference in the risk of major neurological disability at two years of age after oral dextrose gel (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.68; 1554 children; low-certainty evidence). Meta-analysis of the two studies showed that oral dextrose gel probably reduces the risk of receipt of treatment for hypoglycaemia during initial hospital stay (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.00; 2548 infants; moderate-certainty evidence) but probably makes little or no difference to the risk of receipt of intravenous treatment for hypoglycaemia (RR 1.01, 0.68 to 1.49; 2548 infants; moderate-certainty evidence). Oral dextrose gel may have little or no effect on the risk of separation from the mother for treatment of hypoglycaemia (RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.55; two studies, 2548 infants; low-certainty evidence). There is probably little or no difference in the risk of adverse effects in infants who receive oral dextrose gel compared to placebo gel (RR 1.22, 95% CI 0.64 to 2.33; two studies, 2510 infants; moderate-certainty evidence), but there are no studies comparing oral dextrose with other comparators such as no intervention or other therapies. No data were available on exclusive breastfeeding after discharge., Authors' Conclusions: Prophylactic oral dextrose gel reduces the risk of neonatal hypoglycaemia in at-risk infants and probably reduces the risk of treatment for hypoglycaemia without adverse effects. It may make little to no difference to the risk of major neurological disability at two years, but the confidence intervals include the possibility of substantial benefit or harm. Evidence at six to seven years is limited to a single small study. In view of its limited short-term benefits, prophylactic oral dextrose gel should not be incorporated into routine practice until additional information is available about the balance of risks and harms for later neurological disability. Additional large follow-up studies at two years of age or older are required. Future research should also be undertaken in other high-income countries, low- and middle-income countries, preterm infants, using other dextrose gel preparations, and using comparators other than placebo gel. There are three studies awaiting classification and one ongoing study which may alter the conclusions of the review when published., (Copyright © 2023 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.)

Background: Skin-to-skin contact between mother and infant after birth is recommended to promote breastfeeding and maternal-infant bonding. However, its impact on the incidence of neonatal hypoglycaemia is unknown. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess this., Methods: Published randomised control trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs, non-randomised studies of interventions, cohort, or case-control studies with an intervention of skin-to-skin care compared to other treatment were included without language or date restrictions. The primary outcome was neonatal hypoglycaemia (study-defined). We searched 4 databases and 4 trial registries from inception to May 12 th , 2023. Quality of studies was assessed using Cochrane Risk of Bias 1 or Effective Public Health Practice Project Quality Assessment tools. Certainty of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. Results were synthesised using RevMan 5.4.1 or STATA and analysed using random-effects meta-analyses where possible, otherwise with direction of findings tables. This review was registered prospectively on PROSPERO (CRD42022328322)., Results: This review included 84,900 participants in 108 studies, comprising 65 RCTs, 16 quasi-RCTs, seven non-randomised studies of intervention, eight prospective cohort studies, nine retrospective cohort studies and three case-control studies. Evidence suggests skin-to-skin contact may result in a large reduction in the incidence of neonatal hypoglycaemia (7 RCTs/quasi-RCTs, 922 infants, RR 0.29 (0.13, 0.66), p < 0.0001, I 2  = 47%). Skin-to-skin contact may reduce the incidence of admission to special care or neonatal intensive care nurseries for hypoglycaemia (1 observational study, 816 infants, OR 0.50 (0.25-1.00), p = 0.050), but the evidence is very uncertain. Skin-to-skin contact may reduce duration of initial hospital stay after birth (31 RCTs, 3437 infants, MD -2.37 (-3.66, -1.08) days, p = 0.0003, I 2  = 90%, p for Egger's test = 0.02), and increase exclusive breastmilk feeding from birth to discharge (1 observational study, 1250 infants, RR 4.30 (3.19, 5.81), p < 0.0001), but the evidence is very uncertain., Conclusion: Skin-to-skin contact may lead to a large reduction in the incidence of neonatal hypoglycaemia. This, along with other established benefits, supports the practice of skin-to-skin contact for all infants and especially those at risk of hypoglycaemia., (© 2023. BioMed Central Ltd., part of Springer Nature.)

Aim: To examine the relationship between neonatal hypoglycaemia and specific areas of executive function and behaviour in mid-childhood., Method: Participants in a prospective cohort study of infants born late preterm or at term at risk of neonatal hypoglycaemia were assessed at 9 to 10 years. We assessed executive function using performance-based (Cambridge Neuropsychological Tests Automated Battery) and questionnaire-based (Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function) measures and behaviour problems with the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire. Data are reported as adjusted odds ratio (aOR) with 95% confidence intervals, and standardized regression coefficients., Results: We assessed 480 (230 females, 250 males; mean age 9 years 5 months [SD 4 months, range 8 years 8 months-11 years 0 months]) of 587 eligible children (82%). There were no differences in performance-based executive function between children who did and did not experience neonatal hypoglycaemia (blood glucose <2.6 mmoL/L). However, children who experienced hypoglycaemia, especially if severe or recurrent, were at greater risk of parent-reported metacognition difficulties (aOR 2.37-3.71), parent-reported peer (aOR 1.62-1.89) and teacher-reported conduct (aOR 2.14 for severe hypoglycaemia) problems. Both performance- and questionnaire-based executive functions were associated with behaviour problems., Interpretation: Neonatal hypoglycaemia may be associated with difficulties in specific aspects of parent-reported executive functions and behaviour problems in mid-childhood., (© 2023 The Authors. Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Mac Keith Press.)

Objective: Dextrose gel is used to treat neonatal hypoglycaemia, but later effects are unknown., Design and Setting: Follow-up of participants in a randomised trial recruited in a tertiary centre and assessed in a research clinic., Patients: Children who were hypoglycaemic (<2.6 mmol/L) recruited to the Sugar Babies Study ( > 35 weeks, <48 hours old) and randomised to treatment with 40% dextrose or placebo gel., Interventions: Assessment of neurological status, cognitive ability (Weschler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence), executive function (five tasks), motor function (Movement Assessment Battery for Children-2 (MABC-2)), vision, visual processing (Beery-Buktenica Development Test of Visual Motor Integration (Beery VMI) and motion coherence thresholds) and growth at 2 years., Main Outcome Measures: Neurosensory impairment (cerebral palsy; visual impairment; deafness; intelligence quotient <85; Beery VMI <85; MABC-2 score <15th centile; low performance on executive function or motion coherence)., Results: Of 237 babies randomised, 185 (78%) were assessed; 96 randomised to dextrose and 89 to placebo gel. Neurosensory impairment was similar in both groups (dextrose 36/96 (38%) vs placebo 34/87 (39%), relative risk 0.96, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.34, p=0.83). Secondary outcomes were also similar, except children randomised to dextrose had worse visual processing scores (mean (SD) 94.5 (15.9) vs 99.8 (15.9), p=0.02) but no differences in the proportion with visual processing scores <85 or other visual test scores. Children randomised to dextrose gel were taller (z-scores 0.18 (0.97) vs -0.17 (1.01), p=0.001) and heavier (0.57 (1.07) vs 0.29 (0.92), p=0.01)., Conclusions: Treatment of neonatal hypoglycaemia (<2.6 mol/L) with dextrose gel does not alter neurosensory impairment at 4.5 years. However, further assessment of visual processing and growth may be warranted., Trial Registration Number: ACTRN1260800062392., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Introduction: Dextrose gel is widely used as first-line treatment for neonatal hypoglycaemia given its cost-effectiveness and ease of use. The Sugar Babies randomized trial first showed that 40% dextrose gel was more effective in reversing hypoglycaemia than feeding alone. Follow-up of the Sugar Babies Trial cohort at 2 and 4.5 years of age reported that dextrose gel appeared safe, with similar rates of neurosensory impairment in babies randomized to dextrose or placebo gel. However, some effects of neonatal hypoglycaemia may not become apparent until school age., Methods: Follow-up of the Sugar Babies Trial cohort at 9-10 years of age was reported. The primary outcome was low educational achievement in reading or mathematics. Secondary outcomes included other aspects of educational achievement, executive function, visual-motor function, and psychosocial adaptation., Results: Of 227 eligible children, 184 (81%) were assessed at a mean (SD) age of 9.3 (0.2) years. Low educational achievement was similar in dextrose and placebo groups (36/86 [42%] vs. 42/94 [45%]; RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.76, 1.44; p = 0.79). Children allocated to dextrose gel had lower visual perception standard scores (95.2 vs. 100.6; MD -5.68, 95% CI -9.79, -1.57; p = 0.006) and a greater proportion had low (<85) visual perception scores (20/88 [23%] vs. 10/95 [11%]; RR 2.23, 95% CI 1.13, 4.37; p = 0.02). Other secondary outcomes, including other aspects of visual-motor function, were similar in both groups., Conclusion: Treatment dextrose gel does not appear to result in any clinically significant differences in educational achievement or other neurodevelopmental outcomes at mid-childhood., (© 2022 The Author(s). Published by S. Karger AG, Basel.)

Importance: Neonatal hypoglycemia is common, but its association with later neurodevelopment is uncertain., Objective: To examine associations between neonatal hypoglycemia and neurocognitive outcomes at corrected age 2 years., Design, Setting, and Participants: Exploratory cohort analysis of the Hypoglycaemia Prevention With Oral Dextrose (hPOD) randomized clinical trial was conducted. The trial recruited participants from January 9, 2015, to May 5, 2019, with follow-up between January 26, 2017, and July 31, 2021. Infants were recruited from 9 maternity hospitals in New Zealand and assessed at home or in a research clinic. Children born late preterm and at term at risk of neonatal hypoglycemia but without evidence of acute or imminent illness in the first hour after birth were screened and treated to maintain blood glucose concentrations greater than or equal to 47 mg/dL., Exposures: Hypoglycemia was defined as any blood glucose concentration less than 47 mg/dL, recurrent as 3 or more episodes, and severe as less than 36 mg/dL., Main Outcomes and Measures: Neurologic examination and tests of development (Bayley III) and executive function. The primary outcome was neurosensory impairment (any of the following: blindness, deafness, cerebral palsy, developmental delay, or executive function total score worse than 1.5 SD below the mean)., Results: A total of 1197 of 1321 (91%) eligible children were assessed at a mean of corrected age 24 months; 616 (52%) were male. Compared with the normoglycemia group, children who experienced hypoglycemia were more likely to have neurosensory impairment (111 [23%] vs 125 [18%]; adjusted risk ratio [aRR], 1.28; 95% CI, 1.01-1.60), particularly if they experienced severe episodes (30 [28%] vs 125 [18%]; aRR, 1.68; 95% CI, 1.20-2.36), but not recurrent episodes (12 [19%] vs 125 [18%]; aRR, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.63-1.80). The risk of cognitive, language, or motor delay was similar between groups, but children who experienced hypoglycemia had lower Bayley-III composite cognitive (adjusted mean difference [aMD], -1.48; 95% CI, -2.79 to -0.18) and motor scores (aMD, -2.05; 95% CI, -3.30 to -0.79)., Conclusions and Relevance: In children born at risk of hypoglycemia but otherwise well, those who experienced neonatal hypoglycemia were more likely to have neurosensory impairment at corrected age 2 years, with higher risks after severe episodes. Further research is required to determine causality.

Objective: To determine the effect of prophylactic dextrose gel on the infant gut microbiome., Design: Observational cohort study nested in a randomised trial., Setting: Three maternity hospitals in New Zealand., Patients: Infants at risk of neonatal hypoglycaemia whose parents consented to participation in the hypoglycaemia Prevention in newborns with Oral Dextrose trial (hPOD). Infants were randomised to receive prophylactic dextrose gel or placebo gel, or were not randomised and received no gel (controls). Stool samples were collected on days 1, 7 and 28., Main Outcome Measures: The primary outcome was microbiome beta-diversity at 4 weeks. Secondary outcomes were beta-diversity, alpha-diversity, bacterial DNA concentration, microbial community stability and relative abundance of individual bacterial taxa at each time point., Results: We analysed 434 stool samples from 165 infants using 16S rRNA gene amplicon sequencing. There were no differences between groups in beta-diversity at 4 weeks (p=0.49). There were also no differences between groups in any other microbiome measures including beta-diversity (p=0.53 at day 7), alpha-diversity (p=0.46 for day 7 and week 4), bacterial DNA concentration (p=0.91), microbial community stability (p=0.52) and microbial relative abundance at genus level. There was no evidence that exposure to any dextrose gel (prophylaxis or treatment) had any effect on the microbiome. Mode of birth, type of milk fed, hospital of birth and ethnicity were all associated with differences in the neonatal microbiome., Conclusions: Clinicians and consumers can be reassured that dextrose gel used for prophylaxis or treatment of neonatal hypoglycaemia does not alter the neonatal gut microbiome., Trial Registration Number: 12614001263684., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Introduction: Infants with severe or recurrent transitional hypoglycaemia continue to have high rates of adverse neurological outcomes and new treatment approaches are needed that target the underlying pathophysiology. Diazoxide is one such treatment that acts on the pancreatic β-cell in a dose-dependent manner to decrease insulin secretion., Methods and Analysis: Phase IIB, double-blind, two-arm, parallel, randomised trial of diazoxide versus placebo in neonates ≥35 weeks' gestation for treatment of severe (blood glucose concentration (BGC)<1.2 mmol/L or BGC 1.2 to <2.0 mmol/L despite two doses of buccal dextrose gel and feeding in a single episode) or recurrent (≥3 episodes <2.6 mmol/L in 48 hours) transitional hypoglycaemia. Infants are loaded with diazoxide 5 mg/kg orally and then commenced on a maintenance dose of 1.5 mg/kg every 12 hours, or an equal volume of placebo. The intervention is titrated from the third maintenance dose by protocol to target BGC in the range of 2.6-5.4 mmol/L. The primary outcome is time to resolution of hypoglycaemia, defined as the first point at which the following criteria are met concurrently for ≥24 hours: no intravenous fluids, enteral bolus feeding and normoglycaemia. Groups will be compared for the primary outcome using Cox's proportional hazard regression analysis, expressed as adjusted HR with a 95% CI., Ethics and Dissemination: This trial has been approved by the Health and Disability Ethics Committees of New Zealand (19CEN189). Findings will be disseminated in peer-reviewed journals, to clinicians and researchers at local and international conferences and to the public., Trial Registration Number: ACTRN12620000129987., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Introduction: Routinely collected data can be linked to research data to create a rich dataset and inform practice. However, consent is normally required to link identifiable data. Reported rates of consent to data linkage for children ranged from 21% to 96%, but no studies have investigated different approaches to seeking consent for data linkage for school-age children., Methods and Analysis: The A pproaches to Co nsent for R outine Data Linkage in N eonatal Follow-up (ACORN) trial is a 2×2 factorial randomised trial to assess whether, for children who participated in neonatal randomised trials (pre-hypoglycaemia Prevention with Oral Dextrose Gel (hPOD), hPOD and The Impact of Protein Intravenous Nutrition on Development in Extremely Low Birth Weight Babies (ProVIDe)) and are approached to participate in an in-person assessment at 6-7 years of age, parental consent to data linkage is higher if consent is sought (1) after the in-person assessment (delayed) or concurrently and (2) for health and education data combined or separately. The primary outcomes will be rates of consent to linkage of (1) either health or education data and (2) both health and education data. A pilot study indicates the potentially available cohort size of 2110 (80% follow-up of the neonatal trial cohorts) would be adequate to detect an absolute difference of 6%-5%-4% from a baseline consent rate of 70%-85%-90%, respectively (2-tailed alpha 0.05, 90% power). With at least 1136 participants, the ACORN trial would have 90% power to detect an absolute difference of 5% in the primary outcome for each factor, assuming a consent rate of 90% in the control groups and alpha 0.05. Data are categorical and will be presented as number and per cent. The effects of factors will be tested using generalised linear models and presented as ORs and 95% CIs., Ethics and Dissemination: Ethics approval by the New Zealand Health and Disability Ethics Committee (19/STH/202). Dissemination will be via peer-reviewed publications, scientific meetings, educational sessions and public fora., Trial Registration Number: ACTRN12621000571875 (Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry)., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Aim: We observed wide variation in the management of babies at risk of hypoglycaemia who participated in the hPOD (hypoglycaemia Prevention with Oral Dextrose gel) multicentre trial of prophylactic dextrose gel. The aim of this study was to identify whether this may be due to variations in the clinical guidelines used by participating hospitals., Methods: Guidelines for management of neonatal hypoglycaemia used by participating hospitals were reviewed. Recommendations regarding definition, risk factors, monitoring and treatment were compared between countries, hospital type (tertiary or secondary) and neonatal intensive care unit size (≤12 cots and >12 cots)., Results: The 18 hospitals used 20 guidelines. The recommended diagnostic threshold for hypoglycaemia ranged from <2.0 mmol/L to <2.6 mmol/L, and glucose oxidase method of testing was recommended in seven (47%) of 15 guidelines. There was broad agreement about which infants should be monitored. Oral dextrose was the recommended first line of treatment in 17 of 20 guidelines, but the glucose threshold at which this should be used varied (≤2.6 mmol/L in New Zealand, 1.5-2.6 mmol/L in Australia). Re-checking blood glucose concentrations after oral dextrose was recommended at 30 min in most (10/11, 91%) New Zealand guidelines but at 60 min in most (4/6, 67%) Australian guidelines. There was greatest variation in recommended thresholds for referral to paediatric services or neonatal intensive care unit, and administration of intravenous dextrose. There were no significant differences between guidelines used by tertiary and secondary hospitals, or large and small hospitals., Conclusion: There is wide variation in guideline recommendations for the management of neonatal hypoglycaemia across New Zealand and Australian neonatal units., (© 2021 Paediatrics and Child Health Division (The Royal Australasian College of Physicians).)

Importance: Neonatal hypoglycemia is associated with increased risk of poor executive and visual-motor function, but implications for later learning are uncertain., Objective: To test the hypothesis that neonatal hypoglycemia is associated with educational performance at age 9 to 10 years., Design, Setting, and Participants: Prospective cohort study of moderate to late preterm and term infants born at risk of hypoglycemia. Blood and masked interstitial sensor glucose concentrations were measured for up to 7 days. Infants with hypoglycemic episodes (blood glucose concentration <47 mg/dL [2.6 mmol/L]) were treated to maintain a blood glucose concentration of at least 47 mg/dL. Six hundred fourteen infants were recruited at Waikato Hospital, Hamilton, New Zealand, in 2006-2010; 480 were assessed at age 9 to 10 years in 2016-2020., Exposures: Hypoglycemia was defined as at least 1 hypoglycemic event, representing the sum of nonconcurrent hypoglycemic and interstitial episodes (sensor glucose concentration <47 mg/dL for ≥10 minutes) more than 20 minutes apart., Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was low educational achievement, defined as performing below or well below the normative curriculum level in standardized tests of reading comprehension or mathematics. There were 47 secondary outcomes related to executive function, visual-motor function, psychosocial adaptation, and general health., Results: Of 587 eligible children (230 [48%] female), 480 (82%) were assessed at a mean age of 9.4 (SD, 0.3) years. Children who were and were not exposed to neonatal hypoglycemia did not significantly differ on rates of low educational achievement (138/304 [47%] vs 82/176 [48%], respectively; adjusted risk difference, -2% [95% CI, -11% to 8%]; adjusted relative risk, 0.95 [95% CI, 0.78-1.15]). Children who were exposed to neonatal hypoglycemia, compared with those not exposed, were significantly less likely to be rated by teachers as being below or well below the curriculum level for reading (68/281 [24%] vs 49/157 [31%], respectively; adjusted risk difference, -9% [95% CI, -17% to -1%]; adjusted relative risk, 0.72 [95% CI, 0.53-0.99; P = .04]). Groups were not significantly different for other secondary end points., Conclusions and Relevance: Among participants at risk of neonatal hypoglycemia who were screened and treated if needed, exposure to neonatal hypoglycemia compared with no such exposure was not significantly associated with lower educational achievement in mid-childhood.

Importance: Prophylactic oral dextrose gel reduces neonatal hypoglycemia, but later benefits or harms remain unclear., Objective: To assess the effects on later development of prophylactic dextrose gel for infants born at risk of neonatal hypoglycemia., Design, Setting, and Participants: Prospective follow-up of a multicenter randomized clinical trial conducted in 18 Australian and New Zealand hospitals from January 2015 to May 2019. Participants were late preterm or term at-risk infants; those randomized in 9 New Zealand centers (n = 1359) were included and followed up between January 2017 and July 2021., Interventions: Infants were randomized to prophylactic 40% dextrose (n = 681) or placebo (n = 678) gel, 0.5 mL/kg, massaged into the buccal mucosa 1 hour after birth., Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome of this follow-up study was neurosensory impairment at 2 years' corrected age. There were 44 secondary outcomes, including cognitive, language, and motor composite Bayley-III scores (mean [SD], 100 [15]; higher scores indicate better performance)., Results: Of eligible infants, 1197 (91%) were assessed (581 females [49%]). Neurosensory impairment was not significantly different between the dextrose and placebo gel groups (20.8% vs 18.7%; unadjusted risk difference [RD], 2.09% [95% CI, -2.43% to 6.60%]; adjusted risk ratio [aRR], 1.13 [95% CI, 0.90 to 1.41]). The risk of cognitive and language delay was not significantly different between the dextrose and placebo groups (cognitive: 7.6% vs 5.3%; RD, 2.32% [95% CI, -0.46% to 5.11%]; aRR, 1.40 [95% CI, 0.91 to 2.17]; language: 17.0% vs 14.7%; RD, 2.35% [95% CI, -1.80% to 6.50%]; aRR, 1.19 [95% CI, 0.92 to 1.54]). However, the dextrose gel group had a significantly higher risk of motor delay (2.5% vs 0.7%; RD, 1.81% [95% CI, 0.40% to 3.23%]; aRR, 3.79 [95% CI, 1.27 to 11.32]) and significantly lower composite scores for cognitive (adjusted mean difference [aMD], -1.30 [95% CI, -2.55 to -0.05]), language (aMD, -2.16 [95% CI, -3.86 to -0.46]), and motor (aMD, -1.40 [95% CI, -2.60 to -0.20]) performance. There were no significant differences between groups in the other 27 secondary outcomes., Conclusions and Relevance: Among late preterm and term infants born at risk of neonatal hypoglycemia, prophylactic oral 40% dextrose gel at 1 hour of age, compared with placebo, resulted in no significant difference in the risk of neurosensory impairment at 2 years' corrected age. However, the study may have been underpowered to detect a small but potentially clinically important increase in risk, and further research including longer-term follow-up is required., Trial Registration: anzctr.org.au Identifier: ACTRN12614001263684.

Background: Neonatal hypoglycaemia, a common condition, can be associated with brain injury. It is frequently managed by providing infants with an alternative source of glucose, often given enterally with milk-feeding or intravenously with dextrose solution, which may decrease breastfeeding success. Intravenous dextrose also often requires that mother and baby are cared for in separate environments. Oral dextrose gel is simple and inexpensive, and can be administered directly to the buccal mucosa for rapid correction of hypoglycaemia, in association with continued breastfeeding and maternal care. This is an update of a previous review published in 2016., Objectives: To assess the effectiveness of oral dextrose gel in correcting hypoglycaemia in newborn infants from birth to discharge home and reducing long-term neurodevelopmental impairment., Search Methods: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, and Embase from database inception to October 2021.  We also searched international clinical trials networks, the reference lists of included trials, and relevant systematic reviews identified in the search.  SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs comparing oral dextrose gel versus placebo, no treatment, or other therapies for the treatment of neonatal hypoglycaemia in newborn infants from birth to discharge home., Data Collection and Analysis: Two review authors independently assessed study quality and extracted data; they did not assess publications for which they were study authors. We contacted investigators to obtain additional information. We used fixed-effect models and the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of evidence., Main Results: We included two studies conducted in high-income countries, involving 312 late preterm and at-risk term infants and comparing oral dextrose gel (40% concentration) to placebo gel. One study was at low risk of bias, and the other (an abstract) was at unclear to high risk of bias. Oral dextrose gel compared with placebo gel probably increases correction of hypoglycaemic events (rate ratio 1.08, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.98 to 1.20; rate difference 66 more per 1000, 95% CI 17 fewer to 166 more; 1 study; 237 infants; moderate-certainty evidence), and may result in a slight reduction in the risk of major neurological disability at age two years or older, but the evidence is uncertain (risk ratio (RR) 0.46, 95% CI 0.09 to 2.47; risk difference (RD) 24 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 41 fewer to 66 more; 1 study, 185 children; low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of oral dextrose gel compared with placebo gel or no gel on the need for intravenous treatment for hypoglycaemia (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.46 to 1.32; RD 37 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 91 fewer to 54 more; 2 studies, 312 infants; very low-certainty evidence). Investigators in one study of 237 infants reported no adverse events (e.g. choking or vomiting at the time of administration) in the oral dextrose gel or placebo gel group (low-certainty evidence).  Oral dextrose gel compared with placebo gel probably reduces the incidence of separation from the mother for treatment of hypoglycaemia (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.93; RD 116 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 174 fewer to 18 fewer; 1 study, 237 infants; moderate-certainty evidence), and increases the likelihood of exclusive breastfeeding after discharge (RR 1.10, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.18; RD 87 more per 1000, 95% CI 9 more to 157 more; 1 study, 237 infants; moderate-certainty evidence).   AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Oral dextrose gel (specifically 40% dextrose concentration) used to treat hypoglycaemia in newborn infants (specifically at-risk late preterm and term infants) probably increases correction of hypoglycaemic events, and may result in a slight reduction in the risk of major neurological disability at age two years or older. Oral dextrose gel treatment probably reduces the incidence of separation from the mother for treatment and increases the likelihood of exclusive breastfeeding after discharge. No adverse events have been reported. Oral dextrose gel is probably an effective and safe first-line treatment for infants with neonatal hypoglycaemia in high-income settings.  More evidence is needed about the effects of oral dextrose gel treatment on later neurological disability and the need for other treatments for hypoglycaemia. Future studies should be conducted in low-and middle-income settings, in extremely and moderately preterm infants, and compare oral dextrose gel with other therapies such as intravenous dextrose. There are two ongoing studies that may alter the conclusions of this review when published., (Copyright © 2016 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.)

Neonatal hypoglycaemia is a common metabolic disorder that may cause brain damage, most visible in parieto-occipital regions on MRI in the acute phase. However, the long term effects of neonatal hypoglycaemia on the brain are not well understood. We investigated the association between neonatal hypoglycaemia and brain volumes, cortical thickness and white matter microstructure at 9-10 years. Children born at risk of neonatal hypoglycaemia at ≥ 36 weeks' gestation who took part in a prospective cohort study underwent brain MRI at 9-10 years. Neonatal hypoglycaemia was defined as at least one hypoglycaemic episode (at least one consecutive blood glucose concentration < 2.6 mmol/L) or interstitial episode (at least 10 min of interstitial glucose concentrations < 2.6 mmol/L). Brain volumes and cortical thickness were computed using Freesurfer. White matter microstructure was assessed using tract-based spatial statistics. Children who had (n = 75) and had not (n = 26) experienced neonatal hypoglycaemia had similar combined parietal and occipital lobe volumes and no differences in white matter microstructure at nine years of age. However, those who had experienced neonatal hypoglycaemia had smaller caudate volumes (mean difference: -557 mm 3 , 95% confidence interval (CI), -933 to -182, p = 0.004) and smaller thalamus (-0.03%, 95%CI, -0.06 to 0.00; p = 0.05) and subcortical grey matter (-0.10%, 95%CI -0.20 to 0.00, p = 0.05) volumes as percentage of total brain volume, and thinner occipital lobe cortex (-0.05 mm, 95%CI -0.10 to 0.00, p = 0.05) than those who had not. The finding of smaller caudate volumes after neonatal hypoglycaemia was consistent across analyses of pre-specified severity groups, clinically detected hypoglycaemic episodes, and severity and frequency of hypoglycaemic events. Neonatal hypoglycaemia is associated with smaller deep grey matter brain regions and thinner occipital lobe cortex but not altered white matter microstructure in mid-childhood., (Copyright © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To determine the effects of different doses of prophylactic dextrose gel on glycemic stability assessed using continuous glucose monitoring in the first 48 hours when given to babies at risk of neonatal hypoglycemia., Study Design: Continuous glucose monitoring was undertaken for the first 48 hours in 133 infants at risk of hypoglycemia who participated in the pre-hPOD randomized dosage trial of dextrose gel prophylaxis., Results: Low glucose concentrations were detected in 41% of infants by blood glucose monitoring and 68% by continuous interstitial glucose monitoring. The mean ± SD duration of low interstitial glucose concentrations was 295 ± 351 minutes in the first 48 hours. Infants who received any dose of dextrose gel seemed to be less likely than those who received placebo gel to experience low glucose concentrations (<47 mg/dL [2.6 mmol/L]; P = .08), particularly if they received a single dose of 200 mg/kg (relative risk, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.50-0.10; P = .049). They also spent a greater proportion of time in the central glucose concentration range of 54-72 mg/dL (3-4 mmol/L) (any dose, mean ± SD, 58.2 ± 20.3%; placebo, 50.0 ± 21.9%; mean difference, 8.20%; 95% CI, 0.43-15.9%; P = .038). Dextrose gel did not increase recurrent or severe episodes of low glucose concentrations and did not increase the peak glucose concentration. These effects were similar for all trial dosages., Conclusions: Low glucose concentrations were common in infants at risk of hypoglycemia despite blood glucose monitoring and treatment. Prophylactic dextrose gel reduced the risk of hypoglycemia without adverse effects on glucose stability., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Neonatal hypoglycaemia is associated with adverse development, particularly visual-motor and executive function impairment, in childhood. As neonatal hypoglycaemia is common and frequently asymptomatic in at-risk babies-ie, those born preterm, small or large for gestational age, or to mothers with diabetes, it is recommended that these babies are screened for hypoglycaemia in the first 1-2 days after birth with frequent blood glucose measurements. Neonatal hypoglycaemia can be prevented and treated with buccal dextrose gel, and it is also common to treat babies with hypoglycaemia with infant formula and intravenous dextrose. However, it is uncertain if screening, prophylaxis, or treatment improves long-term outcomes of babies at risk of neonatal hypoglycaemia. This narrative review assesses the latest evidence for screening, prophylaxis, and treatment of neonates at risk of hypoglycaemia to improve long-term neurodevelopmental outcomes., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests We declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Neonatal hypoglycaemia is a common condition that can be associated with brain injury. Current practice usually includes early identification of at-risk infants (e.g. infants of diabetic mothers; preterm, small- or large-for-gestational-age infants), and prophylactic measures are advised. However, these measures usually involve use of formula milk or admission to the neonatal unit. Dextrose gel is non-invasive, inexpensive and effective for treatment of neonatal hypoglycaemia. Prophylactic dextrose gel can reduce the incidence of neonatal hypoglycaemia, thus potentially reducing separation of mother and baby and supporting breastfeeding, as well as preventing brain injury.  This is an update of a previous Cochrane Review published in 2017.  OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness and safety of oral dextrose gel given to newborn infants at risk of hypoglycaemia in preventing hypoglycaemia and reducing long-term neurodevelopmental impairment., Search Methods: We used the standard search strategy of Cochrane Neonatal to search the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2020, Issue 10) in the Cochrane Library; and Ovid MEDLINE(R) and Epub Ahead of Print, In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, Daily and Versions(R) on 19 October 2020. We also searched clinical trials databases and the reference lists of retrieved articles for randomised controlled trials and quasi-randomised trials., Selection Criteria: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs comparing oral dextrose gel versus placebo, no intervention, or other therapies for the prevention of neonatal hypoglycaemia., Data Collection and Analysis: Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias. We contacted investigators to obtain additional information. We used fixed-effect meta-analyses. We used the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of evidence., Main Results: We included two studies conducted in high-income countries comparing oral dextrose gel versus placebo in 2548 infants at risk of neonatal hypoglycaemia. Of these, one study was included in the previous version of this review. We judged these two studies to be at low risk of bias, and that the evidence for most outcomes was of moderate certainty. Meta-analysis of the two studies showed that oral dextrose gel reduces the risk of hypoglycaemia (risk ratio (RR) 0.87, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.79 to 0.95; risk difference (RD) -0.06, 95% CI -0.10 to -0.02; 2548 infants; high certainty evidence). One study reported that oral dextrose gel probably reduces the risk of major neurological disability at two years' corrected age (RR 0.21, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.78; RD -0.05, 95% CI -0.09 to 0.00; 360 infants; moderate certainty evidence). Meta-analysis of the two studies showed that oral dextrose gel probably reduces the risk of receipt of treatment for hypoglycaemia during initial hospital stay (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.00; 2548 infants; moderate certainty evidence) but makes little or no difference to the risk of receipt of intravenous treatment for hypoglycaemia (RR 1.01, 0.68 to 1.49; 2548 infants; moderate certainty evidence). Oral dextrose gel may have little or no effect on the risk of separation from the mother for treatment of hypoglycaemia (RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.55; two studies, 2548 infants; low certainty evidence). There is probably little or no difference in the risk of adverse events in infants who receive oral dextrose gel compared to placebo gel (RR 1.22, 95% CI 0.64 to 2.33; two studies, 2510 infants; moderate certainty evidence), but there are no studies comparing oral dextrose with other comparators such as no treatment, standard care or other therapies. No data were available on exclusive breastfeeding after discharge., Authors' Conclusions: Oral dextrose gel reduces the risk of neonatal hypoglycaemia in at-risk infants and probably reduces the risk of major neurological disability at two years of age or greater without increasing the risk of adverse events compared to placebo gel. Additional large follow-up studies at two years of age or older are required. Future research should also be undertaken in low- and middle-income countries, preterm infants, using other dextrose gel preparations, and using comparators other than placebo gel. There are three studies awaiting classification and one ongoing study which may alter the conclusions of the review when published., (Copyright © 2021 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.)

Objective: To determine the effect of prophylactic dextrose gel for prevention of neonatal hypoglycaemia on neurodevelopment and executive function at 2 years' corrected age., Design: Prospective follow-up of a randomised trial., Setting: New Zealand., Patients: Participants from the pre-hypoglycaemia Prevention with Oral Dextrose (pre-hPOD) trial randomised to one of four dose regimes of buccal 40% dextrose gel or equivolume placebo., Main Outcome Measures: Coprimary outcomes were neurosensory impairment and executive function. Secondary outcomes were components of the primary outcomes, neurology, anthropometry and health measures., Results: We assessed 360 of 401 eligible children (90%) at 2 years' corrected age. There were no differences between dextrose gel dose groups, single or multiple dose groups, or any dextrose and any placebo groups in the risk of neurosensory impairment or low executive function (any dextrose vs any placebo neurosensory impairment: relative risk (RR) 0.77, 95% CI 0.50 to 1.19, p=0.23; low executive function: RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.24 to 1.06, p=0.07). There were also no differences between groups in any secondary outcomes. There was no difference between children who did or did not develop neonatal hypoglycaemia in the risk of neurosensory impairment (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.64, p=0.81) or low executive function (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.34 to 1.59, p=0.43)., Conclusion: Prophylactic dextrose gel did not alter neurodevelopment or executive function and had no adverse effects to 2 years' corrected age, but this study was underpowered to detect potentially clinically important effects on neurosensory outcomes., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: We performed a case-control study to characterise infants with "prolonged transitional hypoglycaemia"., Methods: Cases were born ≥36 weeks' gestation; had ≥1 hypoglycaemic episode <72 h and ≥72 h; received ongoing treatment for hypoglycaemia ≥72 h; and were without congenital disorders or acute illness. Cases were compared to controls born ≥36 weeks' with brief transitional hypoglycaemia, resolving <72 h., Results: 39/471 infants screened met case definition: 71.8% were male, 61.5% were small-for-gestational-age (SGA), and most were admitted <6 h. Compared to controls (N = 75), key risk factors for prolonged transitional hypoglycaemia were SGA (OR = 6.4, 95%CI 2.7-15.1), severe/recurrent hypoglycaemia <24 h (OR = 16.7, 95%CI 4.5-16.1), intravenous glucose bolus <24 h (OR = 26.6, 95%CI 9.4-75.1) and maximum glucose delivery rate <48 h of ≥8 mg/kg/min (OR = 25.5, 95%CI 7.7-84.1)., Conclusions: Infants with prolonged transitional hypoglycaemia are predominantly male, SGA and have early severe/recurrent hypoglycaemia requiring glucose boluses and high glucose delivery rates in the first 24-48 h.

Objectives: To determine plasma lactate and beta-hydroxybutyrate (BHB) concentrations of healthy infants in the first 5 days and their relationships with glucose concentrations., Study Design: Prospective masked observational study in Hamilton, New Zealand. Term, appropriately grown singletons had heel-prick blood samples, 4 in the first 24 hours then twice daily., Results: In 67 infants, plasma lactate concentrations were higher in the first 12 hours (median, 20; range, 10-55 mg/dL [median, 2.2 mmol/L; range, 1.1-6.2 mmol/L]), decreasing to 12 mg/dL (range, 7-29 mg/dL [median, 1.4 mmol/L; range, 0.8-3.3 mmol/L]) after 48 hours. Plasma BHB concentrations were low in the first 12 hours (median, 0.9 mg/dL; range, 0.5-5.2 mg/dL [median, 0.1 mmol/L; range, 0.05-0.5 mmol/L]), peaked at 48-72 hours (median, 7.3 mg/dL; range, 1.0-25.0 mg/dL [median, 0.7 mmol/L; range, 0.05-2.4 mmol/L]), and decreased by 96 hours (median, 0.9 mg/dL; range, 0.5-16.7 mg/dL [median, 0.1 mmol/L; range, 0.05-1.6 mmol/L]). Compared with infants with plasma glucose concentrations above the median (median, 67 mg/dL [median, 3.7 mmol/L]), those with lower glucose had lower lactate concentrations in the first 12 hours and higher BHB concentrations between 24 and 96 hours. Lower interstitial glucose concentrations were also associated with higher plasma BHB concentrations, but only if the lower glucose lasted greater than 12 hours. Glucose contributed 72%-84% of the estimated potential adenosine triphosphate throughout the 5 days, with lactate contributing 25% on day 1 and BHB 7% on days 2-3., Conclusions: Lactate on day 1 and BHB on days 2-4 may contribute to cerebral fuels in healthy infants, but are unlikely to provide neuroprotection during early or acute hypoglycemia., Trial Registration: The Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry: ACTRN12615000986572., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Neonatal hypoglycaemia is a common but treatable metabolic disorder that affects newborn infants and which, if not identified and treated adequately, may result in neurological sequelae that persist for the lifetime of the patient. The long-term financial and quality-of-life burden of neonatal hypoglycaemia has not been previously examined., Methods: We assessed the postnatal hospital and long-term costs associated with neonatal hypoglycaemia over 80 year and 18 year time horizons, using a health-system perspective and assessing impact on quality of life using quality-adjusted life year (QALYs). A decision analytic model was used to represent key outcomes in the presence and absence of neonatal hypoglycaemia., Results: The chance of developing one of the outcomes of neonatal hypoglycaemia in our model (cerebral palsy, learning disabilities, seizures, vision disorders) was 24.03% in subjects who experienced neonatal hypoglycaemia and 3.56% in those who do did not. Over an 80 year time horizon a subject who experienced neonatal hypoglycaemia had a combined hospital and post-discharge cost of NZ$72,000 due to the outcomes modelled, which is NZ$66,000 greater than a subject without neonatal hypoglycaemia. The net monetary benefit lost due to neonatal hypoglycaemia, using a value per QALY of NZ$43,000, is NZ$180,000 over an 80 year time horizon., Conclusions: Even under the most conservative of estimates, neonatal hypoglycaemia contributes a significant financial burden to the health system both during childhood and over a lifetime. The combination of direct costs and loss of quality of life due to neonatal hypoglycaemia means that this condition warrants further research to focus on prevention and effective treatment.

Background: Neonatal hypoglycemia is common and can cause brain injury. Buccal dextrose gel is effective for treatment of neonatal hypoglycemia, and when used for prevention may reduce the incidence of hypoglycemia in babies at risk, but its clinical utility remains uncertain., Methods and Findings: We conducted a multicenter, double-blinded, placebo-controlled randomized trial in 18 New Zealand and Australian maternity hospitals from January 2015 to May 2019. Babies at risk of neonatal hypoglycemia (maternal diabetes, late preterm, or high or low birthweight) without indications for neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) admission were randomized to 0.5 ml/kg buccal 40% dextrose or placebo gel at 1 hour of age. Primary outcome was NICU admission, with power to detect a 4% absolute reduction. Secondary outcomes included hypoglycemia, NICU admission for hypoglycemia, hyperglycemia, breastfeeding at discharge, formula feeding at 6 weeks, and maternal satisfaction. Families and clinical and study staff were unaware of treatment allocation. A total of 2,149 babies were randomized (48.7% girls). NICU admission occurred for 111/1,070 (10.4%) randomized to dextrose gel and 100/1,063 (9.4%) randomized to placebo (adjusted relative risk [aRR] 1.10; 95% CI 0.86, 1.42; p = 0.44). Babies randomized to dextrose gel were less likely to become hypoglycemic (blood glucose < 2.6 mmol/l) (399/1,070, 37%, versus 448/1,063, 42%; aRR 0.88; 95% CI 0.80, 0.98; p = 0.02) although NICU admission for hypoglycemia was similar between groups (65/1,070, 6.1%, versus 48/1,063, 4.5%; aRR 1.35; 95% CI 0.94, 1.94; p = 0.10). There were no differences between groups in breastfeeding at discharge from hospital (aRR 1.00; 95% CI 0.99, 1.02; p = 0.67), receipt of formula before discharge (aRR 0.99; 95% CI 0.92, 1.08; p = 0.90), and formula feeding at 6 weeks (aRR 1.01; 95% CI 0.93, 1.10; p = 0.81), and there was no hyperglycemia. Most mothers (95%) would recommend the study to friends. No adverse effects, including 2 deaths in each group, were attributable to dextrose gel. Limitations of this study included that most participants (81%) were infants of mothers with diabetes, which may limit generalizability, and a less reliable analyzer was used in 16.5% of glucose measurements., Conclusions: In this placebo-controlled randomized trial, prophylactic dextrose gel 200 mg/kg did not reduce NICU admission in babies at risk of hypoglycemia but did reduce hypoglycemia. Long-term follow-up is needed to determine the clinical utility of this strategy., Trial Registration: ACTRN 12614001263684., Competing Interests: I have read the journal's policy and the authors of this manuscript have the following competing interests: JH has in the past received an unrestricted research grant from Biomed Auckland, who manufacture dextrose gel. That sponsor had no role in this study, and in particular, no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

Objective: To evaluate the long-term costs and impact on quality of life of using prophylactic dextrose gel in patients at increased risk of developing neonatal hypoglycemia., Study Design: A cost-utility analysis was performed from the perspective of the health system, using a decision tree to model the long-term clinical outcomes of neonatal hypoglycemia, including cerebral palsy, epilepsy, vision disturbances, and learning disabilities, in patients at increased risk of neonatal hypoglycemia who received prophylactic dextrose gel vs standard care. Model parameters including likelihoods of hypoglycemia and admission to a neonatal intensive care unit, were based on the pre-Hypoglycemia Prevention with Oral Dextrose Study. Estimations of the likelihood of long-term condition(s), and their costs, were based on review of published literature., Results: Patients who received prophylactic dextrose gel incurred costs to the health system of around US $14 000 over an 18-year time horizon, accruing 11.25 quality-adjusted life-years, whereas those who did not receive prophylactic treatment incurred cost of around $16 000 and experienced a utility of 11.10 quality-adjusted life-years., Conclusions: A prophylactic strategy of using dextrose gel in infants at increased risk of neonatal hypoglycemia is likely to be cost effective compared with standard care, to reduce the direct costs to the health system over an 18-year time horizon, and improve quality of life., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Babies may use alternative cerebral fuels including ketones when blood glucose concentrations are low, but laboratory ketone measurements are slow and expensive. Point-of-care measurement of ketone concentrations, if sufficiently accurate, may provide useful information for clinical care., Patients and Design: Eligible babies were 35-42 weeks' gestation, ≤10 days old and admitted to the newborn intensive care unit. At the time of clinically indicated blood tests, additional samples were taken to measure beta-hydroxybutyrate using a point-of-care analyser and the laboratory method., Results: One-hundred and fifty babies had 142 paired samples. Overall point-of-care accuracy was excellent (mean difference 0.00 mmol/L) and precision was moderate (SD 0.18 mmol/L). A point-of-care measurement ≥0.4 mmol/L was highly predictive of a laboratory measurement ≥0.4 mmol/L (area under the curve 0.98)., Conclusion: Point-of-care measurement of blood beta-hydroxybutyrate concentrations is sufficiently accurate in newborns to be potentially useful in clinical care., Clinical Trial Registration Number: Registered with the Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN: 12616000784415. The study was registered before recruitment commenced., Competing Interests: Competing interests: The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Aims: To determine the use of oral dextrose gel to treat neonatal hypoglycaemia in New Zealand (NZ), to identify barriers and enablers to the implementation of the guideline and to determine if there is variation in management between clinical disciplines caring for at-risk babies., Methods: An online survey was distributed to clinicians (including doctors, midwives and nurses) caring for babies with neonatal hypoglycaemia via stakeholders and maternity hospitals., Results: A total of 251 clinicians from all 20 District Health Boards (DHBs) completed the survey. Of the responding clinicians, 148 (59%) from 15 (75%) DHBs reported oral dextrose gel use in their hospital, and of these, 129 (87%) reported a local guideline. In 12 of 15 (80%) DHBs, oral dextrose gel could be prescribed by midwives. For a clinical scenario of a baby with neonatal hypoglycaemia, doctors were more likely to prescribe oral dextrose gel than midwives (odds ratio (95% confidence interval), 2.9 (2.2-3.8), P < 0.0001). Of 32 possible combinations of treatment options for this scenario, 31 were selected by one or more clinicians. A guideline was perceived to be the most useful enabler, and availability of oral dextrose gel was seen as the most important barrier., Conclusions: Oral dextrose gel is widely used to treat neonatal hypoglycaemia in NZ. Increasing availability of dextrose gel and the clinical practice guideline are likely to further increase the use of oral dextrose gel., (© 2018 Paediatrics and Child Health Division (The Royal Australasian College of Physicians).)

Higher and unstable glucose concentrations in the first 48 hours in neonates at risk of hypoglycaemia have been associated with neurosensory impairment. It is unclear what defines and contributes to instability. This was a prospective study of term and late preterm babies (N = 139) born at risk of neonatal hypoglycaemia who had interstitial glucose (IG) monitoring and ≥1 hypoglycaemic episode <48 hours after birth (blood glucose concentration <2.6 mmol/l [<47 mg/dl]). For 6-hour epochs after each hypoglycaemic episode, masked IG parameters (time to reach maximum IG concentration [hours]; range, average, maximum and minimum IG concentrations; proportion of IG measurements outside the central band of 3-4 mmol/l [54-72 md/dl]; and total duration [hours] of IG concentrations <2.6 mmol/l) were analysed in tertiles and related to: (i) glycaemic instability in the first 48 hours (defined as the proportion of blood glucose concentrations outside the central band in the first 48 hours); (ii) risk factors and treatment for each episode; and (iii) risk of neurosensory impairment at 4.5 years, or at 2 years if a child was not seen at 4.5 years. Glycaemic instability in the first 48 hours was related to IG instability after hypoglycaemia. Risk factors for hypoglycaemia were not related to IG parameters. Treatment with intravenous dextrose was associated with higher IG maximum and range, and lower minimum compared to treatment with dextrose gel plus breast milk, breast milk alone or formula alone. The risk of neurosensory impairment was increased with both shorter and longer time to reach maximum epoch IG (P = 0.04; lower tertile [0.4-2.2 hours] vs middle [2.3-4.2 hours] OR 3.10 [95% CI 1.03; 9.38]; higher tertile [4.3-6.0 hours] vs middle OR 3.07; [95% CI 1.01; 9.24]). Glycaemic response to hypoglycaemia contributes to overall glycaemic instability in newborns and is influenced by treatment. Slow or rapid recovery of hypoglycaemia appears to be associated with neurosensory impairment.

Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared.

Background: Feeding is often used for the initial treatment of hypoglycaemia, but it is not known if pre-feed alertness and observed quality of breastfeeding are related to the subsequent change in blood glucose concentration., Objective: We sought to determine if assessment of pre-feed alertness and the observed quality of the breastfeed were related to the subsequent change in blood glucose concentration in hypoglycaemic babies., Methods: Babies were ≥35 weeks, ≤48 h old, identified as being at-risk for hypoglycaemia (infants of diabetic mothers, small [< 2,500 g or < 10th centile] or large [birthweight > 4,500 g or > 90th centile] birthweight) and hypoglycaemic (< 2.6 mM). Midwives assessed pre-feed alertness and quality of feeding at each hypoglycaemic episode. Change in blood glucose concentration was assessed within 15-90 min., Results: One hundred and thirty-one babies had 163 hypoglycaemic episodes. Babies assessed as alert had a greater increase in blood glucose concentration than sleepy babies (mean [95% CI] awake 0.71 [0.61-0.82] vs. sleepy 0.51 [0.35-0.66] mM, p = 0.04). The change in blood glucose concentration was similar after feeds of different observed quality (offered, 0.50 [0.29-0.72], latched, 0.66 [0.52-0.81], swallowing 0.65 [0.54-0.76] mM, p = 0.13)., Conclusions: Observed quality of breastfeeding is not a useful predictor of the change in blood glucose concentration in hypoglycaemic babies., (© 2019 S. Karger AG, Basel.)

Objective: To evaluate the costs of using dextrose gel as a primary treatment for neonatal hypoglycemia in the first 48 hours after birth compared with standard care., Study Design: We used a decision tree to model overall costs, including those specific to hypoglycemia monitoring and treatment and those related to the infant's length of stay in the postnatal ward or neonatal intensive care unit, comparing the use of dextrose gel for treatment of neonatal hypoglycemia with placebo, using data from the Sugar Babies randomized trial. Sensitivity analyses assessed the impact of dextrose gel cost, neonatal intensive care cost, cesarean delivery rate, and costs of glucose monitoring., Results: In the primary analysis, treating neonatal hypoglycemia using dextrose gel had an overall cost of NZ$6863.81 and standard care (placebo) cost NZ$8178.25; a saving of NZ$1314.44 per infant treated. Sensitivity analyses showed that dextrose gel remained cost saving with wide variations in dextrose gel costs, neonatal intensive care unit costs, cesarean delivery rates, and costs of monitoring., Conclusions: Use of buccal dextrose gel reduces hospital costs for management of neonatal hypoglycemia. Because it is also noninvasive, well tolerated, safe, and associated with improved breastfeeding, buccal dextrose gel should be routinely used for initial treatment of neonatal hypoglycemia., Trial Registration: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry: ACTRN12608000623392., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: The aim of the study was to determine whether changes to early nutrition are associated with levels of glycemia in very preterm infants., Methods: A retrospective, observational study of infants <1500 g or <30 weeks' gestation admitted to Neonatal Intensive Care, National Women's Hospital, New Zealand, before (Old Protocol) and after (New Protocol) a change in nutritional protocol. Nutritional intakes were calculated and averaged by day for postnatal days 1 to 7 (week 1) and 1 to 28 (month 1). Relationships between glycemia measures, macronutrient intakes, and achievement of 10% enteral feeds (≥10% total intake) were explored using logistic regression., Results: Old Protocol (n = 190) and New Protocol (n = 267) groups had similar baseline characteristics. In week 1, New Protocol infants received more protein, less fat, and carbohydrate, had lower mean blood glucose concentrations (BGCs) (mean ± SD 4.9 ± 1.2 vs 5.6 ± 1.4 mmoll/L, P < 0.0001), less hyperglycemia (BGC > 8.5 mmol/L, 71 [27%] vs 80 [42%], P = 0.0005), but similar hypoglycemia (BGC < 2.6). In month 1, New Protocol infants also had less hyperglycemia (105 [39%] vs 96 [51%], P = 0.02) and lower mean BGC (5.0 ± 1.1 vs 5.5 ± 1.1 mmol/L, P < 0.0001), but insulin usage was similar. After adjustment for birth weight z score and gestational age, hyperglycemia was significantly associated with week 1 intakes (g · kg · day) of protein (odds ratio [95% confidence intervals] 0.47 [0.23-0.79], P = 0.004), fat (0.54 [0.40-0.74], P < 0.0001), and carbohydrate (1.25 [1.09-1.44], P < 0.0001). These relationships were similar for month 1. Each additional day to achieve 10% enteral feeds was associated with increased odds of hypoglycemia (1.09 [1.00-1.18], P = 0.04) and hyperglycemia (1.16 [1.06-1.28], P = 0.002)., Conclusions: In very preterm infants, macronutrient balance and small, early enteral feeds may assist glycemic control.

Purpose of Review: Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) is increasingly used in the management of diabetes in children and adults, but there are few data regarding its use in neonates. The purpose of this article is to discuss the potential benefits and limitations of CGM in neonates., Recent Findings: Smaller electrodes in new sensors and real-time monitoring have made CGM devices more approachable for neonatal care. CGM is well tolerated in infants including very low birth weight babies, and few if any local complications have been reported. Use of CGM in newborns may reduce the frequency of blood sampling and improve glycemic stability, with more time spent in the euglycemic range. However, CGM may also lead to more intervention, with potential adverse effects on outcomes. More information is also needed about reliability, calibration and interpretation of CGM in the neonate., Summary: Although the use of CGM in neonates appears to be well tolerated, feasible and has been associated with better glycemic status, there is not yet any evidence of improved clinical outcomes. Clinical utility of CGM should be demonstrated in randomized trials prior to its introduction into regular neonatal care.

Background: Babies at risk of neonatal hypoglycaemia are often screened using cot-side glucometers, but non-enzymatic glucometers are inaccurate, potentially resulting in over-treatment and under-treatment, and low values require laboratory confirmation. More accurate enzymatic glucometers are available but at apparently higher costs., Objective: Our objective was to compare the cost of screening for neonatal hypoglycaemia using point-of-care enzymatic and non-enzymatic glucometers., Methods: We used a decision tree to model costs, including consumables and staff time. Sensitivity analyses assessed the impact of staff time, staff costs, probability that low results are confirmed via laboratory testing, false-positive and false-negative rates of non-enzymatic glucometers, and the blood glucose concentration threshold., Results: In the primary analysis, screening using an enzymatic glucometer cost NZD 86.94 (USD 63.47) while using a non-enzymatic glucometer cost NZD 97.08 (USD 70.87) per baby. Sensitivity analyses showed that using an enzymatic glucometer is cost saving with wide variations in staff time and costs, irrespective of the false-positive level of non-enzymatic glucometers, and where ≥78% of low values are laboratory confirmed. Where non-enzymatic glucometers may be less costly (e.g., false-negative rate exceeds 15%), instances of hypoglycaemia will be missed. Reducing the blood glucose concentration threshold to 1.94 mmol/L reduced the incidence of hypoglycaemia from 52 to 13%, and the cost of screening using a non-enzymatic glucometer to NZD 47.71 (USD 34.83)., Conclusions: In view of their lower cost in most circumstances and greater accuracy, enzymatic glucometers should be routinely utilised for point-of-care screening for neonatal hypoglycaemia., (© 2018 S. Karger AG, Basel.)

A growing number of babies are born with perinatal risk factors that may impair later development. These children are often assessed at 2 years to help predict outcome and direct support services. Executive function is an important predictor of academic achievement and behavior, but there are limited assessments of executive function in 2-year-olds and few have been tested in at-risk populations. Therefore, we developed a battery of four age-appropriate tasks to assess executive function in 2-year-olds. At 24 months' corrected age 368 children completed tasks assessing attention, inhibition, working memory and cognitive flexibility. Scores on different tasks were weakly correlated, suggesting that they measured separate aspects of executive function, with combined scores for this cohort approximating a normal distribution. Significantly more boys (67%) than girls (57%) were unable to inhibit their behavior on the Snack Delay Task and girls (M = 3.24, SD = 2.4) had higher mean scores than boys (M = 2.7, SD = 2.7) on the Ducks and Buckets Reverse Categorization Task of working memory. Performance was significantly affected by family socioeconomic status. Mean scores were lower on all four individual tasks and on the global score of overall performance in children from a low household income (<$40,000) compared to those from medium ($40,001-$70,000) and high income households (>$70,001). Maternal education was only associated with scores on the working memory task and the global score; and a measure of neighborhood deprivation was only associated with scores on the two inhibitory tasks and the global score. Our findings confirm the feasibility of assessing executive function in 2-year-olds, and its ability to discriminate effects of socioeconomic status, a common confounder in child development research. Further development and standardization of this test battery comparing at-risk children with a normative population would provide a much-needed measure of executive function in early childhood.

Introduction: Neonatal hypoglycaemia is a common condition that can cause developmental delay. Treatment of neonatal hypoglycaemia with oral dextrose gel has been shown to reverse hypoglycaemia and reduce admissions to neonatal intensive care for hypoglycaemia. An evidence-based clinical practice guideline was written to guide the use of dextrose gel to treat neonatal hypoglycaemia in New Zealand. However, it is unclear what clinical discipline might most effectively lead the implementation of the guideline recommendations., Objective: To determine if midwife or doctor local opinion leaders are more effective in implementing a clinical practice guideline for use of oral dextrose gel to treat hypoglycaemia in babies on postnatal wards., Methods and Analysis: A cluster-randomised, blinded, controlled trial. New Zealand maternity hospitals that care for babies born at risk of neonatal hypoglycaemia will be randomised to having either a local midwife or doctor lead the guideline implementation at that hospital. The primary outcome will be the change in the proportion of hypoglycaemic babies treated with dextrose gel from before implementation of the guideline to 3 months after implementation., Ethics and Dissemination: Approved by Health and Disability Ethics Committee: 15/NTA/31. Findings will be disseminated to peer-reviewed journals, guideline developers and the public., Trial Registration Number: ISRCTN61154098., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2017. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.)

Background: Dextrose gel is increasingly used as first-line treatment for neonatal hypoglycaemia. Treatment with 400 mg/kg previously has been reported to impair subsequent feeding. We sought to determine if the recommended dose of 200 mg/kg altered feeding., Methods: Hypoglycaemic babies were randomised to 200 mg/kg dextrose gel or placebo and fed. Prefeed alertness, quality and duration of breast feeding, and the volume of formula taken were assessed on the next feeding., Results: Prefeed alertness scores were similar in babies (n=211) treated with dextrose or placebo gel (124 episodes, OR=1.30 (95% CI 0.62 to 2.77), p=0.49). Breastfed babies were more likely to have good feeding scores after dextrose gel (160 episodes, OR=3.54 (95% CI 1.30 to 9.67), p=0.01) but similar breastfeeding duration (57 episodes, median (range) 20 (3-90) vs 25 (2-80) min, p=0.62). Formula volumes taken were also similar (24 episodes, median (range) 4.6 (2.2-11.3) vs 6.4 (2.0-8.9) mL/kg, p=0.30)., Conclusions: Treating hypoglycaemic babies with dextrose gel 200 mg/kg does not depress subsequent feeding and may improve breastfeeding quality., Trial Registration Number: ACTRN 12608000623392., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2017. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.)

Objective: To determine the change in blood glucose concentration after oral treatment of infants with hypoglycemia in the first 48 hours after birth., Study Design: We analyzed data from 227 infants with hypoglycemia (blood glucose <46.8 mg/dL, 2.6 mmol/L) born at a tertiary hospital who experienced 295 episodes of hypoglycemia. Blood glucose concentrations were measured (glucose oxidase) within 90 minutes after randomization to dextrose or placebo gel plus feeding with formula, expressed breast milk, or breast feeding., Results: The overall mean increase in blood glucose concentration was 11.7 mg/dL (95% CI 10.4-12.8). The increase was greater after buccal dextrose gel than after placebo gel (+3.0 mg/dL; 95% CI 0.7-5.3; P = .01) and greater after infant formula than after other feedings (+3.8 mg/dL; 95% CI 0.8-6.7; P = .01). The increase in blood glucose concentration was not affected by breast feeding (+2.0 mg/dL; 95% CI -0.3 to 44.2; P = .09) or expressed breast milk (-1.4 mg/dL; 95% CI -3.7 to 0.9; P = .25). However, breast feeding was associated with reduced requirement for repeat gel treatment (OR = 0.52; 95% CI 0.28-0.94; P = .03)., Conclusions: Treatment of infants with hypoglycemia with dextrose gel or formula is associated with increased blood glucose concentration and breast feeding with reduced need for further treatment. Dextrose gel and breast feeding should be considered for first-line oral treatment of infants with hypoglycemia., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Importance: Hypoglycemia is common during neonatal transition and may cause permanent neurological impairment, but optimal intervention thresholds are unknown., Objective: To test the hypothesis that neurodevelopment at 4.5 years is related to the severity and frequency of neonatal hypoglycemia., Design, Setting, and Participants: The Children With Hypoglycemia and Their Later Development (CHYLD) Study is a prospective cohort investigation of moderate to late preterm and term infants born at risk of hypoglycemia. Clinicians were masked to neonatal interstitial glucose concentrations; outcome assessors were masked to neonatal glycemic status. The setting was a regional perinatal center in Hamilton, New Zealand. The study was conducted from December 2006 to November 2010. The dates of the follow-up were September 2011 to June 2015. Participants were 614 neonates born from 32 weeks' gestation with at least 1 risk factor for hypoglycemia, including diabetic mother, preterm, small, large, or acute illness. Blood and masked interstitial glucose concentrations were measured for up to 7 days after birth. Infants with hypoglycemia (whole-blood glucose concentration <47 mg/dL) were treated to maintain blood glucose concentration of at least 47 mg/dL., Exposures: Neonatal hypoglycemic episode, defined as at least 1 consecutive blood glucose concentration less than 47 mg/dL, a severe episode (<36 mg/dL), or recurrent (≥3 episodes). An interstitial episode was defined as an interstitial glucose concentration less than 47 mg/dL for at least 10 minutes., Main Outcomes and Measures: Cognitive function, executive function, visual function, and motor function were assessed at 4.5 years. The primary outcome was neurosensory impairment, defined as poor performance in one or more domains., Results: In total, 477 of 604 eligible children (79.0%) were assessed. Their mean (SD) age at the time of assessment was 4.5 (0.1) years, and 228 (47.8%) were female. Those exposed to neonatal hypoglycemia (280 [58.7%]) did not have increased risk of neurosensory impairment (risk difference [RD], 0.01; 95% CI, -0.07 to 0.10 and risk ratio [RR], 0.96; 95% CI, 0.77 to 1.21). However, hypoglycemia was associated with increased risk of low executive function (RD, 0.05; 95% CI, 0.01 to 0.10 and RR, 2.32; 95% CI, 1.17 to 4.59) and visual motor function (RD, 0.03; 95% CI, 0.01 to 0.06 and RR, 3.67; 95% CI, 1.15 to 11.69), with highest risk in children exposed to severe, recurrent, or clinically undetected (interstitial episodes only) hypoglycemia., Conclusions and Relevance: Neonatal hypoglycemia was not associated with increased risk of combined neurosensory impairment at 4.5 years but was associated with a dose-dependent increased risk of poor executive function and visual motor function, even if not detected clinically, and may thus influence later learning. Randomized trials are needed to determine optimal screening and intervention thresholds based on assessment of neurodevelopment at least to school age.

Background: Many newborn babies experience low blood glucose concentrations, a condition referred to as neonatal hypoglycaemia (NH). The effect of NH on visual development in infancy and childhood is of interest because the occipital lobes, which include the primary visual cortex and a number of extrastriate visual areas, may be particularly susceptible to NH-induced injury. In addition, a number of case series have suggested that NH can affect eye and optic nerve development., Objective: To review the existing literature concerning the effect of NH on the visual system., Methods: A PubMed, Embase, Medline, and Google Scholar literature search was conducted using prespecified MeSH terms., Results: The literature reviewed revealed no clear evidence for an effect of NH on the development of the eye and optic nerve. Furthermore, occipital and occipital-parietal lobe injuries following NH often occurred in conjunction with comorbid conditions and were not clearly linked to subsequent visual dysfunction, possibly due to difficulties in measuring vision in young children and a lack of studies at older ages. A recent, large-scale, prospective study of NH outcomes at 2 years of age found no effect of mild-to-moderate NH on visual development., Conclusion: The effect of NH on visual development is unclear. It is currently unknown whether NH affects visual function in mid-to-late childhood when many visual functions reach adult levels., (© 2017 S. Karger AG, Basel.)

Neonatal hypoglycaemia is common, and screening and treatment of babies considered at risk is widespread, despite there being little reliable evidence upon which to base management decisions. Although there is now evidence about which babies are at greatest risk, the threshold for diagnosis, best approach to treatment and later outcomes all remain uncertain. Recent studies suggest that treatment with dextrose gel is safe and effective and may help support breast feeding. Thresholds for intervention require a wide margin of safety in light of information that babies with glycaemic instability and with low glucose concentrations may be associated with a higher risk of later higher order cognitive and learning problems. Randomised trials are urgently needed to inform optimal thresholds for intervention and appropriate treatment strategies., Competing Interests: The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Neonatal hypoglycaemia, a common condition, can be associated with brain injury. It is frequently managed by providing infants with an alternative source of glucose, given enterally with formula or intravenously with dextrose solution. This often requires that mother and baby are cared for in separate environments and may inhibit breast feeding. Dextrose gel is simple and inexpensive and can be administered directly to the buccal mucosa for rapid correction of hypoglycaemia, in association with continued breast feeding and maternal care., Objectives: To assess the effectiveness of dextrose gel in correcting hypoglycaemia and in reducing long-term neurodevelopmental impairment., Search Methods: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) and Web of Science from inception of the database to February 2016. We also searched international clinical trials networks and handsearched proceedings of specific scientific meetings., Selection Criteria: Randomised and quasi-randomised studies comparing dextrose gel versus placebo, no treatment or other therapies for treatment of neonatal hypoglycaemia., Data Collection and Analysis: Two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data and did not assess publications for which they themselves were study authors., Main Results: We included two trials involving 312 infants. No data were available for correction of hypoglycaemia for each hypoglycaemic event. We found no evidence of a difference between dextrose gel and placebo gel for major neurosensory disability at two-year follow-up (risk ratio (RR) 6.27, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.77 to 51.03; one trial, n = 184; quality of evidence very low). Dextrose gel compared with placebo gel or no gel did not alter the need for intravenous treatment for hypoglycaemia (typical RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.46 to 1.32; two trials, 312 infants; quality of evidence very low). Infants treated with dextrose gel were less likely to be separated from their mothers for treatment of hypoglycaemia (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.93; one trial, 237 infants; quality of evidence moderate) and were more likely to be exclusively breast fed after discharge (RR 1.10, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.18; one trial, 237 infants; quality of evidence moderate). Estimated rise in blood glucose concentration following dextrose gel was 0.4 mmol/L (95% CI -0.14 to 0.94; one trial, 75 infants). Investigators in one trial reported no adverse outcomes (n = 237 infants)., Authors' Conclusions: Treatment of infants with neonatal hypoglycaemia with 40% dextrose gel reduces the incidence of mother-infant separation for treatment and increases the likelihood of full breast feeding after discharge compared with placebo gel. No evidence suggests occurrence of adverse effects during the neonatal period or at two years' corrected age. Oral dextrose gel should be considered first-line treatment for infants with neonatal hypoglycaemia.

Objective: To determine neurodevelopmental outcome at 2 years' corrected age in children randomized to treatment with dextrose gel or placebo for hypoglycemia soon after birth (The Sugar Babies Study)., Study Design: This was a follow-up study of 184 children with hypoglycemia (<2.6 mM [47 mg/dL]) in the first 48 hours and randomized to either dextrose (90/118, 76%) or placebo gel (94/119, 79%). Assessments were performed at Kahikatea House, Hamilton, New Zealand, and included neurologic function and general health (pediatrician assessed), cognitive, language, behavior, and motor skills (Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development, Third Edition), executive function (clinical assessment and Behaviour Rating Inventory of Executive Function-Preschool Edition), and vision (clinical examination and global motion perception). Coprimary outcomes were neurosensory impairment (cognitive, language or motor score below -1 SD or cerebral palsy or blind or deaf) and processing difficulty (executive function or global motion perception worse than 1.5 SD from the mean). Statistical tests were two sided with 5% significance level., Results: Mean (± SD) birth weight was 3093 ± 803 g and mean gestation was 37.7 ± 1.6 weeks. Sixty-six children (36%) had neurosensory impairment (1 severe, 6 moderate, 59 mild) with similar rates in both groups (dextrose 38% vs placebo 34%, relative risk 1.11, 95% CI 0.75-1.63). Processing difficulty also was similar between groups (dextrose 10% vs placebo 18%, relative risk 0.52, 95% CI 0.23-1.15)., Conclusions: Dextrose gel is safe for the treatment of neonatal hypoglycemia, but neurosensory impairment is common among these children., Trial Registration: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry: ACTRN 12608000623392., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Neonatal hypoglycemia is common and can cause neurologic impairment, but evidence supporting thresholds for intervention is limited., Methods: We performed a prospective cohort study involving 528 neonates with a gestational age of at least 35 weeks who were considered to be at risk for hypoglycemia; all were treated to maintain a blood glucose concentration of at least 47 mg per deciliter (2.6 mmol per liter). We intermittently measured blood glucose for up to 7 days. We continuously monitored interstitial glucose concentrations, which were masked to clinical staff. Assessment at 2 years included Bayley Scales of Infant Development III and tests of executive and visual function., Results: Of 614 children, 528 were eligible, and 404 (77% of eligible children) were assessed; 216 children (53%) had neonatal hypoglycemia (blood glucose concentration, <47 mg per deciliter). Hypoglycemia, when treated to maintain a blood glucose concentration of at least 47 mg per deciliter, was not associated with an increased risk of the primary outcomes of neurosensory impairment (risk ratio, 0.95; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.75 to 1.20; P=0.67) and processing difficulty, defined as an executive-function score or motion coherence threshold that was more than 1.5 SD from the mean (risk ratio, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.56 to 1.51; P=0.74). Risks were not increased among children with unrecognized hypoglycemia (a low interstitial glucose concentration only). The lowest blood glucose concentration, number of hypoglycemic episodes and events, and negative interstitial increment (area above the interstitial glucose concentration curve and below 47 mg per deciliter) also did not predict the outcome., Conclusions: In this cohort, neonatal hypoglycemia was not associated with an adverse neurologic outcome when treatment was provided to maintain a blood glucose concentration of at least 47 mg per deciliter. (Funded by the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development and others.).