Methadone dose and neonatal abstinence syndrome-systematic review and meta-analysis
ABSTRACT To determine if there is a relationship between maternal methadone dose in pregnancy and the diagnosis or medical treatment of neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS).
PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library and PsychINFO were searched for studies reporting on methadone use in pregnancy and NAS (1966-2009). The relative risk (RR) of NAS was compared for methadone doses above versus below a range of cut-off points. Summary RRs and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were estimated using random effects meta-analysis. Sensitivity analyses explored the impact of limiting meta-analyses to prospective studies or studies using an objective scoring system to diagnose NAS.
A total of 67 studies met inclusion criteria for the systematic review; 29 were included in the meta-analysis. Any differences in the incidence of NAS in infants of women on higher compared with lower doses were statistically non-significant in analyses restricted to prospective studies or to those using an objective scoring system to diagnose NAS.
Severity of the neonatal abstinence syndrome does not appear to differ according to whether mothers are on high- or low-dose methadone maintenance therapy.
SourceAvailable from: Brian T Bateman[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: To provide absolute and relative risk estimates of neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS) based on duration and timing of prescription opioid use during pregnancy in the presence or absence of additional NAS risk factors of history of opioid misuse or dependence, misuse of other substances, non-opioid psychotropic drug use, and smoking. Observational cohort study. Medicaid data from 46 US states. Pregnant women filling at least one prescription for an opioid analgesic at any time during pregnancy for whom opioid exposure characteristics including duration of therapy: short term (<30 days) or long term (≥30 days); timing of use: early use (only in the first two trimesters) or late use (extending into the third trimester); and cumulative dose (in morphine equivalent milligrams) were assessed. Diagnosis of NAS in liveborn infants. 1705 cases of NAS were identified among 290 605 pregnant women filling opioid prescriptions, corresponding to an absolute risk of 5.9 per 1000 deliveries (95% confidence interval 5.6 to 6.2). Long term opioid use during pregnancy resulted in higher absolute risk of NAS per 1000 deliveries in the presence of additional risk factors of known opioid misuse (220.2 (200.8 to 241.0)), alcohol or other drug misuse (30.8 (26.1 to 36.0)), exposure to other psychotropic medications (13.1 (10.6 to 16.1)), and smoking (6.6 (4.3 to 9.6)) than in the absence of any of these risk factors (4.2 (3.3 to 5.4)). The corresponding risk estimates for short term use were 192.0 (175.8 to 209.3), 7.0 (6.0 to 8.2), 2.0 (1.5 to 2.6), 1.5 (1.0 to 2.0), and 0.7 (0.6 to 0.8) per 1000 deliveries, respectively. In propensity score matched analyses, long term prescription opioid use compared with short term use and late use compared with early use in pregnancy demonstrated greater risk of NAS (risk ratios 2.05 (95% confidence interval 1.81 to 2.33) and 1.24 (1.12 to 1.38), respectively). Use of prescription opioids during pregnancy is associated with a low absolute risk of NAS in the absence of additional risk factors. Long term use compared with short term use and late use compared with early use of prescription opioids are associated with increased NAS risk independent of additional risk factors. © Desai et al 2015.BMJ (online) 01/2015; 350:h2102. · 16.38 Impact Factor
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Neonatal Abstinence Syndrome (NAS) is one of the primary negative effects of substance use during pregnancy. The exact statistics regarding NAS and substance use during pregnancy are difficult to determine due to underreporting, especially in the context of pregnancy. Similarly, little is known regarding whether the severity of NAS differs based on substance exposure. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the prevalence of NAS and types of substance use during pregnancy, and determine whether the presentation of NAS symptoms differ based on the type of substance. A retrospective chart review was conducted over a one year period at a tertiary care hospital. One hundred thirty-one mother-infant pairs met the inclusion criteria of documented NAS scores using the Modified Finnegan Scoring Tool and substance use during pregnancy. The results identified a high prevalence of NAS (8.7 %) primarily as a result of exposure to illicit opioids and/or to methadone as the treatment for opioid addiction. In addition, more than half the women on methadone maintenance treatment continued to use additional substances primarily opiates. Infants who were exposed to methadone experienced more severe NAS compared to infants not exposed to methadone including higher peak scores, prolonged NAS treatment, and length of stay. Given the severity of symptoms of the methadone exposed infants and the high rate of opioid use with methadone treatment, evidence-based interventions are required to decrease the negative effects of NAS.Maternal and Child Health Journal 02/2015; DOI:10.1007/s10995-015-1689-y · 2.24 Impact Factor
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Consumption of drugs of abuse, tobacco and alcohol throughout pregnancy is a serious public health problem and results in an important economic cost to the health system. Drug and/or metabolites determination in biological matrices from mother and newborn is an objective measure of in utero drug exposure. We reviewed methods published for the determination of in utero drug exposure from 2007 to 2014, with special focus on meconium, placenta, umbilical cord and newborn hair. Accurate bioanalytical procedures are essential to obtain high-quality data to perform interventions and to establish correlations between analytical measures and clinical outcomes. We included a brief overview of clinical implications of in utero drug exposure to better understand the importance of this serious health issue.Bioanalysis 12/2014; 6(23):3133-53. DOI:10.4155/bio.14.278 · 3.03 Impact Factor