Search

Background While the health, social, and economic impacts of opioid addiction on adults and their communities are well known, the impact of maternal opioid use on the fetus exposed in utero is less well understood. Methods This paper presents the protocol of the ACT NOW Outcomes of Babies with Opioid Exposure (OBOE) Study, a multi-site prospective longitudinal cohort study of infants with antenatal opioid exposure and unexposed controls. Study objectives are to determine the impact of antenatal opioid exposure on brain development and neurodevelopmental outcomes over the first 2 years of life and explore whether family, home, and community factors modify developmental trajectories during this critical time period. Results Primary outcomes related to brain development include cortical volumes, deep cerebral gray matter volumes, resting-state functional connectivity measures, and structural connectivity measures using diffusion tensor imaging. Primary neurodevelopmental outcomes include visual abnormalities, cognitive, language, and motor skills measured using the Bayley Scales of Infant Development and social–emotional and behavioral problems and competence measured by the Brief Infant-Toddler Social and Emotional Assessment. Conclusions The OBOE study has been designed to overcome challenges of previous studies and will help further understanding of the effects of antenatal opioid exposure on early infant development. Impact This study will integrate MRI findings and comprehensive neurodevelopmental assessments to provide early insights into the functional topography of the brain in this high-risk population and assess MRI as a potential biomarker. Rather than conducting neuroimaging at a single time point, the study will include serial MRI assessments from birth to 2 years, allowing for the examination of trajectories throughout this period of rapid brain development. While previous studies often have had limited information on exposures, this study will use umbilical cord assays to accurately measure amounts of opioids and other substances from 20 weeks of gestation to birth.

Neonatal herpes simplex virus (HSV) disease has been treated with high-dose (20 mg/kg/dose) acyclovir since 1991.Determine the safety of acyclovir in infants with neonatal HSV treated with high-dose acyclovir; examine the association between acyclovir dose and exposure with adverse events (AEs).We obtained demographic information and acyclovir dosing via medical records. Acyclovir exposure was calculated using an established pharmacokinetic model.Infants120 days of age with neonatal HSV discharged from four academic children's hospitals.We identified clinical and laboratory adverse events (AEs).We identified 49 infants with neonatal HSV treated with acyclovir; 42 infants had complete 21-day dosing information. Median mean daily dose was 59 mg/kg/day. Clinical AEs were common among all gestational and postnatal age groups. Rash was the most common clinical AE (37 %). Mild laboratory AEs occurred in 2-37 % of infants. The median maximum doses (mg/kg/day) were higher among infants with hypokalemia, elevated blood urea nitrogen, and thrombocytosis. For all other laboratory AEs, the median maximum doses for infants without events were higher or equal to the median maximum dose of infants with the AE. The odds of experiencing any clinical or laboratory AE did not differ by predicted acyclovir exposure for either area under the curve (AUC) or maximum concentration (Cmax) (odds ratio [OR] = 1.00 [0.98, 1.03] and OR = 1.01 [0.93, 1.12], respectively). Although AEs were common with high-dose acyclovir exposure, severe AEs were rare. Acyclovir exposure was not associated with AEs.

ObjectiveTo identify sociodemographic and clinical factors associated with withholding or withdrawing life-sustaining treatment (WWLST) for extremely low gestational age neonates.DesignObservational study of prospectively collected registry data from 19 National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Neonatal Research Network centres on neonates born at 22–28 weeks gestation who died >12 hours through 120 days of age during 2011–2016. Sociodemographic and clinical factors were compared between infants who died following WWLST and without WWLST.ResultsOf 1168 deaths, 67.1% occurred following WWLST. Withdrawal of assisted ventilation (97.4%) was the primary modality. WWLST rates were inversely proportional to gestational age. Life-sustaining treatment was withheld or withdrawn more often for non-Hispanic white infants than for non-Hispanic black infants (72.7% vs 60.4%; 95% CI 1.00 to 1.92) or Hispanic infants (72.7% vs 67.2%; 95% CI 1.32 to 3.72). WWLST rates varied across centres (38.6–92.6%; pConclusionsAmong infants who died, WWLST rates varied widely across centres and were associated with gestational age, race, ethnicity, necrotiing enterocolitis, and severe brain injury. Further exploration is needed into how race, centre, and approaches to care of infants with necrotiing enterocolitis and severe brain injury influence WWLST.

OBJECTIVE: To determine if daily respiratory status improved more in extremely low gestational age premature infants after diuretic exposure compared with those not exposed in modern neonatal intensive care units (NICU). STUDY DESIGN: The Prematurity and Respiratory Outcomes Program (PROP) was a multi-center observational cohort study of 835 extremely premature infants, gestational ages 23 0/7–28 6/7 weeks, enrolled in the first week of life from 13 U.S. tertiary NICUs. We analyzed the PROP study daily medication and respiratory support records of infants up to 34 weeks postmenstrual age. We determined whether there was a temporal association between administration of diuretics and an acute change in respiratory status in premature infants in the NICU, using an ordered categorical ranking of respiratory status. RESULTS: Infants in the diuretic exposed group of PROP were of lower mean gestational age and lower mean birth weight (p 1) for each day after the initial day of diuretic exposure. CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis did not support the ability of diuretics to substantially improve the extremely premature infant’s respiratory status. Further study of both safety and efficacy of diuretics in this setting are warranted. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT01435187

Ranges of advisable nutrient intakes are presented for populations of fully enterally fed very low birth weight infants, based on current evidence and an intensive discussion with experts in July 2013. Recommended ranges of adequate nutrient intakes are expressed as amounts per kilogram body weight per day and also per 100 kcal energy intake. For many nutrients only limited evidence exists at present to precisely define quantitative ranges of adequate intakes. Future research may lead to better knowledge and modification of recommended intake values.

Postnatal growth failure remains a nearly universal complication of extreme prematurity. The incidence of postnatal growth failure is inversely related to gestational age. Unfortunately, by the time growth faltering is recognized, the nutrient deficits that have accumulated can be difficult, if not impossible, to recover. The perceived severity of illness in the first week can significantly impact decisions made related to early nutritional support. It is becoming increasingly clear that optimizing nutrient intake in the first few weeks of life is critical to reduce growth faltering. In order to promote growth and reduce growth faltering, a goal of 120 kcal/kg/day and 3.8 g/kg/day of protein should be supplied to very low birth weight infants by the end of the first week. A combined strategy of both parenteral and enteral nutrition is necessary to ensure that adequate protein and energy intake is delivered and that nutrient deficits are minimized. Finally, careful monitoring of growth--including both linear and head circumference growth--is necessary to achieve optimal outcomes.

While infants who are born extremely premature and develop bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD) have impaired alveolar development and decreased pulmonary diffusion (DLCO), it remains unclear whether infants born less premature and do not develop BPD, healthy premature (HP), have impaired parenchymal development. In addition, there is increasing evidence that pro-angiogenic cells are important for vascular development; however, there is little information on the relationship of pro-angiogenic cells to lung growth and development in infants.and Methods Determine among healthy premature (HP) and fullterm (FT) infants, whether DLCO and alveolar volume (VA) are related to gestational age at birth (GA), respiratory support during the neonatal period (mechanical ventilation [MV], supplemental oxygen [O2], continuous positive airway pressure [CPAP]), and pro-angiogenic circulating hematopoietic stem/progenitor cells (CHSPCs). We measured DLCO, VA, and CHSPCs in infants between 3-33 months corrected-ages; HP (mean GA = 31.7 wks; N = 48,) and FT (mean GA = 39.3 wks; N =88).DLCO was significantly higher in HP than FT subjects, while there was no difference in VA , after adjusting for body length, gender, and race. DLCO and VA were not associated with GA, MV and O2; however, higher values were associated with higher CHSPCs, as well as treatment with CPAP.Our findings suggest that in the absence of extreme premature birth, as well as BPD, prematurity per se, does not impair lung parenchymal development.

Previous results from our trial of early treatment with continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) versus early surfactant treatment in infants showed no significant difference in the outcome of death or bronchopulmonary dysplasia. A lower (vs. higher) target range of oxygen saturation was associated with a lower rate of severe retinopathy but higher mortality. We now report longer-term results from our prespecified hypotheses.Using a 2-by-2 factorial design, we randomly assigned infants born between 24 weeks 0 days and 27 weeks 6 days of gestation to early CPAP with a limited ventilation strategy or early surfactant administration and to lower or higher target ranges of oxygen saturation (85 to 89% or 91 to 95%). The primary composite outcome for the longer-term analysis was death before assessment at 18 to 22 months or neurodevelopmental impairment at 18 to 22 months of corrected age.The primary outcome was determined for 1234 of 1316 enrolled infants (93.8%); 990 of the 1058 surviving infants (93.6%) were evaluated at 18 to 22 months of corrected age. Death or neurodevelopmental impairment occurred in 27.9% of the infants in the CPAP group (173 of 621 infants), versus 29.9% of those in the surfactant group (183 of 613) (relative risk, 0.93; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.78 to 1.10; P=0.38), and in 30.2% of the infants in the lower-oxygen-saturation group (185 of 612), versus 27.5% of those in the higher-oxygen-saturation group (171 of 622) (relative risk, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.94 to 1.32; P=0.21). Mortality was increased with the lower-oxygen-saturation target (22.1%, vs. 18.2% with the higher-oxygen-saturation target; relative risk, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.00 to 1.55; P=0.046).We found no significant differences in the composite outcome of death or neurodevelopmental impairment among extremely premature infants randomly assigned to early CPAP or early surfactant administration and to a lower or higher target range of oxygen saturation. (Funded by the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development and the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; SUPPORT ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00233324.).

To provide healthcare providers, patients, and the general public with a responsible assessment of currently available data on diagnosing gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM).A non-U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, nonadvocate 15-member panel representing the fields of obstetrics and gynecology, maternal-fetal medicine, pediatrics, diabetic research, biostatistics, women's health issues, health services research, decision analysis, health management and policy, health economics, epidemiology, and community engagement. In addition, 16 experts from pertinent fields presented data to the panel and conference audience.Presentations by experts and a systematic review of the literature prepared by the University of Alberta Evidence-based Practice Centre, through the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ). Scientific evidence was given precedence over anecdotal experience.The panel drafted its statement based on scientific evidence presented in open forum and on published scientific literature. The draft statement was posted at http://prevention.nih.gov/ for public comment and the panel released a final statement approximately 10 weeks later. The final statement is an independent report of the panel and is not a policy statement of the NIH or the Federal Government.At present, GDM is commonly diagnosed in the United States using a 1-hour screening test with a 50-gram glucose load followed by a 3-hour 100-gram glucose tolerance test (a two-step approach) for those found to be abnormal on the screen. This approach identifies approximately 5% to 6% of the population as having GDM. In contrast, newly proposed diagnostic strategies rely on the administration of a 2-hour glucose tolerance test (a one-step approach) with a fasting component and a 75-gram glucose load. These strategies differ on whether a 1-hour sample is included, whether two abnormal values are required, and the diagnostic cutoffs that are used. The International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups (IADPSG) has proposed diagnostic thresholds based on demonstrated associations between glycemic levels and an increased risk of obstetric and perinatal morbidities. The panel considered whether a one-step approach to the diagnosis of GDM should be adopted in place of the two-step approach. The one-step approach offers certain operational advantages. The current two-step approach is used only during pregnancy and is largely restricted to the United States. There would be value in a consistent, international diagnostic standard across one's lifespan. This unification would allow better standardization of best practices in patient care and comparability of research outcomes. The one-step approach also holds potential advantages for women and their health care providers, as it would allow a diagnosis to be achieved within the context of one visit as opposed to two. However, the one-step approach, as proposed by the IADPSG, is anticipated to increase the frequency of the diagnosis of GDM by twofold to threefold, to a prevalence of approximately 15% to 20%. There are several concerns regarding the diagnosis of GDM in these additional women. It is not well understood whether the additional women identified by this approach will benefit from treatment, and if so, to what extent. Moreover, the care of these women will generate additional direct and indirect health care costs. There is also evidence that the labeling of these women may have unintended consequences, such as an increase in cesarean delivery and more intensive newborn assessments. In addition, increased patient costs, life disruptions, and psychosocial burdens have been identified. Available studies do not provide clear evidence that a one-step approach is cost-effective in comparison with the current two-step approach. After much deliberation, the panel believes that there are clear benefits to international standardization with regard to the one-step approach. Nevertheless, at present, the panel believes that there is not sufficient evidence to adopt a one-step approach. The panel is particularly concerned about the adoption of new criteria that would increase the prevalence of GDM, and the corresponding costs and interventions, without clear demonstration of improvements in the most clinically important health and patient-centered outcomes. Thus, the panel recommends that the two-step approach be continued. However, given the potential benefits of a one-step approach, resolution of the uncertainties associated with its use would warrant revision of this conclusion.