Flexible Endoscopic Evaluation of Swallowing in Breastfeeding Infants With Laryngomalacia: Observed Clinical and Endoscopic Changes With Alteration of Infant Positioning at the Breast
Abstract:Objectives: This retrospective cohort study uses endoscopic assessment of the pharyngeal phase of swallowing in infants with laryngomalacia, to ascertain the impact of infant positioning on airway compromise and fluid dynamics during breastfeeding. The study aims to identify whether modification of infant positioning at the breast may improve the possibility of safe, successful breastfeeding in infants with laryngomalacia and concurrent breastfeeding difficulty. Methods: Twenty-three infants referred for noisy… Show more
“…Further analysis of the samples showed that three studies included only infants from the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) [ 12 , 14 , 18 ], one focused on mechanically ventilated children [ 23 ], and two had a surgical focus [ 13 , 25 ]. Six studies related to a single diagnosis or symptom: Congenital Zika Syndrome [ 22 ], isolated Pierre-Robin sequence [ 15 ], laryngomalacia [ 16 ] and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) [ 17 ], cerebral palsy [ 26 ], and prematurity [ 19 ]. The remaining 10 samples varied widely in terms of principal diagnosis [ 10 , 11 , 20 , 21 , 24 , 27 – 31 ] (Table 4 ).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In some cases, it was explicitly stated that feeding tubes were removed [ 12 , 18 ] or not removed [ 16 , 23 ]. Eighteen study protocols did not report on that topic.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Three studies exclusively focused on breastfeeding [ 12 , 16 , 20 ] and seven on bottle-feeding [ 13 – 15 , 18 , 19 , 23 , 25 ]. Two even provided standardized information on the type of nipple and consistency of milk [ 14 , 18 ].…”
Background
Although pediatric flexible-endoscopic evaluation of swallowing (FEES) has developed into a standard in dysphagia diagnostics, there are no valid protocols and procedures for children available to date.
Objective
This systematic PROSPERO-registered review aimed to identify implementation protocols for pediatric FEES described in research studies, and to analyze them in detail concerning procedural steps, equipment, and reported outcome.
Methods
Included were all studies reporting a pediatric FEES protocol for children aged 0–18 years, if they described at least two criteria defined in advance. The databases MEDLINE and CINHAL were searched systematically from January 2000 to February 2021. Risk of bias for included studies was assessed using the National Institutes of Health (NIH) quality assessment tool for observational cohort and cross-sectional studies. A narrative synthesis of the FEES protocols was conducted and the results compared in tabular form.
Results
In total 22 studies were included, reporting on FEES in 1547 infants, children, and adolescents with a wide range of diagnoses. It was possible to identify protocols related to all age groups in general as well as to particular groups such as breastfed or bottle-fed infants. None of the included studies demonstrated a good methodological quality; all studies had missing data. Uniform implementation for sub-groups could not be determined. The reported outcome of FEES examinations could not be compared.
Discussion
None of the included studies showed good methodological quality and a significant amount of data were missing; the review still offers a systematic basis for future research to close the serious gap in the area of pediatric FEES. A proposal is made for a minimum requirement for pediatric FEES protocols in scientific studies.
“…Further analysis of the samples showed that three studies included only infants from the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) [ 12 , 14 , 18 ], one focused on mechanically ventilated children [ 23 ], and two had a surgical focus [ 13 , 25 ]. Six studies related to a single diagnosis or symptom: Congenital Zika Syndrome [ 22 ], isolated Pierre-Robin sequence [ 15 ], laryngomalacia [ 16 ] and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) [ 17 ], cerebral palsy [ 26 ], and prematurity [ 19 ]. The remaining 10 samples varied widely in terms of principal diagnosis [ 10 , 11 , 20 , 21 , 24 , 27 – 31 ] (Table 4 ).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In some cases, it was explicitly stated that feeding tubes were removed [ 12 , 18 ] or not removed [ 16 , 23 ]. Eighteen study protocols did not report on that topic.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Three studies exclusively focused on breastfeeding [ 12 , 16 , 20 ] and seven on bottle-feeding [ 13 – 15 , 18 , 19 , 23 , 25 ]. Two even provided standardized information on the type of nipple and consistency of milk [ 14 , 18 ].…”
Background
Although pediatric flexible-endoscopic evaluation of swallowing (FEES) has developed into a standard in dysphagia diagnostics, there are no valid protocols and procedures for children available to date.
Objective
This systematic PROSPERO-registered review aimed to identify implementation protocols for pediatric FEES described in research studies, and to analyze them in detail concerning procedural steps, equipment, and reported outcome.
Methods
Included were all studies reporting a pediatric FEES protocol for children aged 0–18 years, if they described at least two criteria defined in advance. The databases MEDLINE and CINHAL were searched systematically from January 2000 to February 2021. Risk of bias for included studies was assessed using the National Institutes of Health (NIH) quality assessment tool for observational cohort and cross-sectional studies. A narrative synthesis of the FEES protocols was conducted and the results compared in tabular form.
Results
In total 22 studies were included, reporting on FEES in 1547 infants, children, and adolescents with a wide range of diagnoses. It was possible to identify protocols related to all age groups in general as well as to particular groups such as breastfed or bottle-fed infants. None of the included studies demonstrated a good methodological quality; all studies had missing data. Uniform implementation for sub-groups could not be determined. The reported outcome of FEES examinations could not be compared.
Discussion
None of the included studies showed good methodological quality and a significant amount of data were missing; the review still offers a systematic basis for future research to close the serious gap in the area of pediatric FEES. A proposal is made for a minimum requirement for pediatric FEES protocols in scientific studies.
“…Descriptions of pediatric FEES routines were recently published by Miller, Schroeder, and Langmore [ 21 ] and Miller and Willging [ 22 ]. Modified procedures especially for breastfeeding [ 23 , 24 ] or for the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) [ 25 , 26 ] have been tried and found to be safe. Objective methods for a transfer into a score such as the penetration-aspiration scale (PAS) according to Rosenbek [ 27 ] have not yet been validated for pediatric FEES, but are frequently in use.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Descriptions of pediatric FEES routines were recently published by Miller, Schroeder, and Langmore [21] and Miller and Willging [22]. Modified procedures especially for breastfeeding [23,24] or for the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) [25,26] have been tried and found to be safe.…”
This study aimed to critically review pediatric swallowing assessment data to determine the future need for standardized procedures. A retrospective analysis of 152 swallowing examinations in 128 children aged 21 days to 18 years was performed. The children were presented at a university dysphagia center between January 2015 and June 2020 for flexible-endoscopic evaluation of swallowing (FEES). Descriptive analysis was conducted for the sample, swallowing pathologies, diagnosis, and missing values. Using binary logistic regression, the relationship between dysphagia and underlying diseases was investigated. The largest group with a common diagnosis in the cohort were children with genetic syndromes (n = 43). Sixty-nine children were diagnosed with dysphagia and 59 without dysphagia. The non-dysphagic group included 15 patients with a behavioral feeding disorder. The presence of an underlying disease significantly increased the chance of a swallowing problem (OR 13.08, 95% CI 3.66 to 46.65, p = .00). In particular, the categories genetic syndrome (OR 2.60, 95% CI 1.15 to 5.88) and neurologic disorder (OR 4.23, 95% CI 1.31 to 13.69) were associated with higher odds for dysphagia. All pediatric FEES were performed without complications, with a completion rate of 96.7%, and with a broad variability of implementation. Several charts lacked information concerning swallowing pathologies, though. Generally, a more standardized protocol and documentation for pediatric FEES is needed to enable better comparability of studies on epidemiology, assessment, and treatment outcomes in future.
ObjectiveTo evaluate management strategies and pulmonary outcomes for breastfed infants with oropharyngeal dysphagia.Study DesignWe performed a retrospective cohort study of breastfed infants diagnosed with oropharyngeal dysphagia with documented aspiration or laryngeal penetration on videofluoroscopic swallow study (VFSS). Medical records were reviewed for VFSS results and speech‐language pathologist recommendations following VFSS, results of chest x‐ray, results of bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) within 1 year of VFSS, and aspiration‐related hospitalizations occurring before or within 1 year of VFSS. Subjects were categorized as cleared or not cleared to breastfeed based on the VFSS. Proportions were compared with Chi‐square and Fisher's exact tests and means with Student's t‐tests.ResultsSeventy‐six infants (4.7 ± 0.4 months old) were included; 50% (38) had aspiration and 50% (38) had laryngeal penetration. After VFSS, 70% (53) were cleared to breastfeed while 30% (23) were not cleared to breastfeed. Patients with aspiration were less likely to be cleared to breastfeed (p = .006); however, 55% (21/38) of those with aspiration were still cleared to breastfeed. Infants cleared to breastfeed had significantly more pulmonary hospitalizations (p = .04) and were also at increased risk of elevated neutrophil count (p = .02) and culture growth on BAL (p = .01). Significantly increased abnormal neutrophil count was also found in those cleared to breastfeed with laryngeal penetration (p = .01).ConclusionsInfants with oropharyngeal dysphagia counseled to continue breastfeeding had increased risk of BAL inflammation and more pulmonary hospitalizations compared to those that were told to stop breastfeeding.
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.