Background: Apnea of prematurity (AOP) is a common complication of preterm birth, for which caffeine is the first treatment of choice. In case of persistent AOP, doxapram has been advocated as an additional therapy. Objective: To identify and appraise all existing evidence regarding efficacy and safety of doxapram use for AOP in infants born before 34 weeks of gestational age. Methods: All studies reporting on doxapram use for AOP were identified by searching electronic databases, references from relevant studies, and abstracts from the Societies for Pediatric Research. Two reviewers independently assessed study eligibility and quality, and extracted data on study design, patient characteristics, efficacy and safety outcomes. Results: The randomized controlled trials showed less apnea during doxapram treatment when compared to placebo, but no difference in treatment effect when compared to theophylline. No serious adverse effects were reported. We identified 28 observational studies consisting mainly of cohort studies and case series (n = 1,994). There was considerable heterogeneity in study design and quality. Most studies reported a positive effect of doxapram on apnea rate. A few studies reported on long-term outcomes with conflicting results. A range of possible doxapram-related short-term adverse effects were reported, sometimes associated with the use of higher doses. Conclusion: Based on the limited number of studies and level of evidence, no firm conclusions on the efficacy and safety of doxapram in preterm infants can be drawn. For this reason, routine use cannot be recommended. A large multicenter randomized controlled trial is urgently needed to provide more conclusive evidence.
Background and Objective: Restrictive use of invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) in preterm infants reduces the risk of bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD). Our objective was to determine its effect on neurodevelopmental impairment (NDI) at 24 months' corrected age (CA). Methods: This retrospective single-center cohort study included all patients with a gestational age <30 weeks born in 2004/2005 (epoch 1) and 2010/2011 (epoch 2). In epoch 2, we introduced a policy of restriction on IMV and liberalized the use of respiratory stimulants in the delivery room and neonatal intensive care. Data on patient characteristics, respiratory management, short-term outcomes, mortality, BPD, and NDI at 24 months' CA were collected. Results: Four hundred and four preterm infants were included. Compared to those in epoch 1, infants in epoch 2 were less likely to be intubated and the duration of IMV was shorter. Other noninvasive adjuvant therapies such as caffeine, doxapram, and nasal ventilation were more often used during epoch 2. There was a trend to less BPD in epoch 2 compared to epoch 1 (17 vs. 23%, adjusted OR = 0.75, 95% CI: 0.48, 1.16). Mortality did not change over time. The combined outcome death or NDI at 24 months' CA was significantly lower in epoch 2 compared to epoch 1 (24.7 vs. 33.9%, adjusted OR = 0.71, 95% CI: 0.53, 0.97). Conclusions: Restricted use of IMV is feasible in preterm infants and might be associated with a reduced risk of the combined outcome death or NDI at 24 months' CA. Larger studies are needed to confirm these findings.
Background: Doxapram has been advocated as a treatment for persistent apnea of prematurity (AOP). Objective: To evaluate the effect of doxapram on long-term neurodevelopmental outcome in preterm infants as its safety still needs to be established. Methods: From a retrospective cohort of preterm infants with a gestational age (GA) <30 weeks and/or a birth weight <1,250 g, born between 2000 and 2010, infants treated with doxapram (n = 142) and a nontreated control group were selected (n = 284). Patient characteristics and clinical and neurodevelopmental outcome data at 24 months' corrected age were collected. Neurodevelopmental delay (ND) was defined as having a Mental or Psychomotor Developmental Index (MDI/PDI) <-1 standard deviation (SD), cerebral palsy, or a hearing or visual impairment. Odds ratios (OR) were calculated using multiple logistic regression analyses adjusting for potential confounders. Results: Infants treated with doxapram had a lower GA compared to controls. The number of infants with a MDI or PDI <-1 SD was not different between the groups. The risk of the combined outcome death or ND was significantly lower in the doxapram group after adjusting for confounding factors (OR = 0.54, 95% CI: 0.37, 0.78). Doxapram-treated infants had a higher risk of bronchopulmonary dysplasia and patent ductus arteriosus, but a lower risk of spontaneous intestinal perforation. All other morbidities were not different between the groups. Conclusions: This study suggests that doxapram is not associated with an increased risk of ND. These findings need to be confirmed or refuted by a large, well-designed, placebo-controlled randomized trial.
Electrical impedance tomography (EIT) allows non-invasive and radiation-free monitoring of regional ventilation distribution and changes in end-expiratory lung volume in critically ill patients of all ages. In the vulnerable neonatal and pediatric population, EIT can be used to identify adverse events like atelectasis, pneumothorax and endotracheal tube malposition and potentially guide the personalized selection of ventilator settings. Previous studies have examined EIT in small patient groups during short measurement periods of only a few hours or less under highly controlled circumstances. What This Study Adds to the Field:In the Continuous Regional Analysis Device for Neonate Lungs (CRADL) project, we performed the first multi-center observational study on the use of EIT in critically ill neonates and young children with or at risk for respiratory failure. Including 200 patients, we demonstrated that continuous EIT monitoring for up to 72 hours is feasible, safe and can be used for continuous monitoring of ventilation distribution in neonates and infants in a routine clinical setting.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.