Search

Background Access to diagnostic tools like chest radiography (CXR) is challenging in resource-limited areas. Despite reduced reliance on CXR due to the need for quick clinical decisions, its usage remains prevalent in the approach to neonatal respiratory distress syndrome (NRDS). Objectives To assess CXR’s role in diagnosing and grading NRDS severity compared to current clinical features and laboratory standards. Methods A review of studies with NRDS diagnostic criteria was conducted across six databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, BVS, Scopus-Elsevier, Web of Science, Cochrane) up to 3 March 2023. Independent reviewers selected studies, with discrepancies resolved by a senior reviewer. Data were organised into descriptive tables to highlight the use of CXR and clinical indicators of NRDS. Results Out of 1,686 studies screened, 23 were selected, involving a total of 2,245 newborns. All selected studies used CXR to diagnose NRDS, and 21 (91%) applied it to assess disease severity. While seven reports (30%) indicated that CXR is irreplaceable by other diagnostic tools for NRDS diagnosis, 10 studies (43%) found that alternative methods surpassed CXR in several respects, such as severity assessment, monitoring progress, predicting the need for surfactant therapy, foreseeing Continuous Positive Airway Pressure failure, anticipating intubation requirements, and aiding in differential diagnosis. Conclusion CXR remains an important diagnostic tool for NRDS. Despite its continued use in scientific reports, the findings suggest that the study’s outcomes may not fully reflect the current global clinical practices, especially in low-resource settings where the early NRDS approach remains a challenge for neonatal survival. Trial registration: PROSPERO number CRD42022336480.

BackgroundA handheld optical device was developed to evaluate a newborn's skin maturity by assessing the photobiological properties of the tissue and processing it with other variables to predict early neonatal prognosis related to prematurity. This study assessed the device's ability to predict respiratory distress syndrome (RDS).MethodsTo assess the device's utility we enrolled newborns at childbirth in six urban perinatal centers from two multicenter single-blinded clinical trials. All newborns had inpatient follow-up until 72 h of life. We trained supervised machine learning models with data from 780 newborns in a Brazilian trial and provided external validation with data from 305 low-birth-weight newborns from another trial that assessed Brazilian and Mozambican newborns. The index test measured skin optical reflection with an optical sensor and adjusted acquired values with clinical variables such as birth weight and prenatal corticoid exposition for lung maturity, maternal diabetes, and hypertensive disturbances. The performance of the models was evaluated using intrasample k-parts cross-validation and external validation in an independent sample.ResultsModels adjusting three predictors (skin reflection, birth weight, and antenatal corticoid exposure) or five predictors had a similar performance, including or not maternal diabetes and hypertensive diseases. The best global accuracy was 89.7 (95% CI: 87.4 to 91.8, with a high sensitivity of 85.6% (80.2 to 90.0) and specificity of 91.3% (95% CI: 88.7 to 93.5). The test correctly discriminated RDS newborns in external validation, with 82.3% (95% CI: 77.5 to 86.4) accuracy. Our findings demonstrate a new way to assess a newborn's lung maturity, providing potential opportunities for earlier and more effective care.Trial registrationRBR-3f5bm5 (online access: http://www.ensaiosclinicos.gov.br/rg/RBR-3f5bm5/), and RBR-33mjf (online access: https://ensaiosclinicos.gov.br/rg/RBR-33rnjf/).

IntroductionA new medical device was previously developed to estimate gestational age (GA) at birth by processing a machine learning algorithm on the light scatter signal acquired on the newborn's skin. The study aims to validate GA calculated by the new device (test), comparing the result with the best available GA in newborns with low birth weight (LBW).MethodsWe conducted a multicenter, non-randomized, and single-blinded clinical trial in three urban referral centers for perinatal care in Brazil and Mozambique. LBW newborns with a GA over 24 weeks and weighing between 500 and 2,500 g were recruited in the first 24 h of life. All pregnancies had a GA calculated by obstetric ultrasound before 24 weeks or by reliable last menstrual period (LMP). The primary endpoint was the agreement between the GA calculated by the new device (test) and the best available clinical GA, with 95% confidence limits. In addition, we assessed the accuracy of using the test in the classification of preterm and SGA. Prematurity was childbirth before 37 gestational weeks. The growth standard curve was Intergrowth-21st, with the 10th percentile being the limit for classifying SGA.ResultsAmong 305 evaluated newborns, 234 (76.7%) were premature, and 139 (45.6%) were SGA. The intraclass correlation coefficient between GA by the test and reference GA was 0.829 (95% CI: 0.785–0.863). However, the new device (test) underestimated the reference GA by an average of 2.8 days (95% limits of agreement: −40.6 to 31.2 days). Its use in classifying preterm or term newborns revealed an accuracy of 78.4% (95% CI: 73.3–81.6), with high sensitivity (96.2%; 95% CI: 92.8–98.2). The accuracy of classifying SGA newborns using GA calculated by the test was 62.3% (95% CI: 56.6–67.8).DiscussionThe new device (test) was able to assess GA at birth in LBW newborns, with a high agreement with the best available GA as a reference. The GA estimated by the device (test), when used to classify newborns on the first day of life, was useful in identifying premature infants but not when applied to identify SGA infants, considering current algohrithm. Nonetheless, the new device (test) has the potential to provide important information in places where the GA is unknown or inaccurate.

BackgroundEarly access to antenatal care and high-cost technologies for pregnancy dating challenge early neonatal risk assessment at birth in resource-constrained settings. To overcome the absence or inaccuracy of postnatal gestational age (GA), we developed a new medical device to assess GA based on the photobiological properties of newborns’ skin and predictive models. ObjectiveThis study aims to validate a device that uses the photobiological model of skin maturity adjusted to the clinical data to detect GA and establish its accuracy in discriminating preterm newborns. MethodsA multicenter, single-blinded, and single-arm intention-to-diagnosis clinical trial evaluated the accuracy of a novel device for the detection of GA and preterm newborns. The first-trimester ultrasound, a second comparator ultrasound, and data regarding the last menstrual period (LMP) from antenatal reports were used as references for GA at birth. The new test for validation was performed using a portable multiband reflectance photometer device that assessed the skin maturity of newborns and used machine learning models to predict GA, adjusted for birth weight and antenatal corticosteroid therapy exposure. ResultsThe study group comprised 702 pregnant women who gave birth to 781 newborns, of which 366 (46.9%) were preterm newborns. As the primary outcome, the GA as predicted by the new test was in line with the reference GA that was calculated by using the intraclass correlation coefficient (0.969, 95% CI 0.964-0.973). The paired difference between predicted and reference GAs was −1.34 days, with Bland-Altman limits of −21.2 to 18.4 days. As a secondary outcome, the new test achieved 66.6% (95% CI 62.9%-70.1%) agreement with the reference GA within an error of 1 week. This agreement was similar to that of comparator-LMP-GAs (64.1%, 95% CI 60.7%-67.5%). The discrimination between preterm and term newborns via the device had a similar area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (0.970, 95% CI 0.959-0.981) compared with that for comparator-LMP-GAs (0.957, 95% CI 0.941-0.974). In newborns with absent or unreliable LMPs (n=451), the intent-to-discriminate analysis showed correct preterm versus term classifications with the new test, which achieved an accuracy of 89.6% (95% CI 86.4%-92.2%), while the accuracy for comparator-LMP-GA was 69.6% (95% CI 65.3%-73.7%). ConclusionsThe assessment of newborn’s skin maturity (adjusted by learning models) promises accurate pregnancy dating at birth, even without the antenatal ultrasound reference. Thus, the novel device could add value to the set of clinical parameters that direct the delivery of neonatal care in birth scenarios where GA is unknown or unreliable. International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID)RR2-10.1136/bmjopen-2018-027442