Article

Intensive care for extreme prematurity--moving beyond gestational age.

Center for Clinical Research and Evidence-Based Medicine, University of Texas Medical School at Houston, Houston, TX 77030, USA.
New England Journal of Medicine (Impact Factor: 54.42). 05/2008; 358(16):1672-81. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa073059
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Decisions regarding whether to administer intensive care to extremely premature infants are often based on gestational age alone. However, other factors also affect the prognosis for these patients.
We prospectively studied a cohort of 4446 infants born at 22 to 25 weeks' gestation (determined on the basis of the best obstetrical estimate) in the Neonatal Research Network of the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development to relate risk factors assessable at or before birth to the likelihood of survival, survival without profound neurodevelopmental impairment, and survival without neurodevelopmental impairment at a corrected age of 18 to 22 months.
Among study infants, 3702 (83%) received intensive care in the form of mechanical ventilation. Among the 4192 study infants (94%) for whom outcomes were determined at 18 to 22 months, 49% died, 61% died or had profound impairment, and 73% died or had impairment. In multivariable analyses of infants who received intensive care, exposure to antenatal corticosteroids, female sex, singleton birth, and higher birth weight (per each 100-g increment) were each associated with reductions in the risk of death and the risk of death or profound or any neurodevelopmental impairment; these reductions were similar to those associated with a 1-week increase in gestational age. At the same estimated likelihood of a favorable outcome, girls were less likely than boys to receive intensive care. The outcomes for infants who underwent ventilation were better predicted with the use of the above factors than with use of gestational age alone.
The likelihood of a favorable outcome with intensive care can be better estimated by consideration of four factors in addition to gestational age: sex, exposure or nonexposure to antenatal corticosteroids, whether single or multiple birth, and birth weight. (ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT00063063 [ClinicalTrials.gov] and NCT00009633 [ClinicalTrials.gov].).

0 Bookmarks
 · 
97 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Perinatal care at the limits of viability: Flemish guidelines All Flemish neonatal and maternal intensive care units agree on an individual approach in case of threatening extremely preterm birth between 24 0/7 and 26 6/7 weeks of gestational age, after extensive counseling taking into account not only fetal/neonatal death, but also morbidity, maternal risks and other factors influencing the prognosis. Before 24 0/7 weeks, it is generally advised not to provide intensive care but only palliative comfort care. Transfer to a tertiary center can be offered at any moment, but certainly from 23 5/7 weeks on to allow parents to make an informed choice in consent with care providers. When an active treatment is chosen, this includes antenatal corticosteroids, magnesium and if necessary a C-section.
    Tijdschrift voor geneeskunde. 01/2014; 70(20).
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Bei kleinen Frühgeborenen tritt neben der Frage des Überlebens die der Langzeitpro­ gnose immer mehr in den Vordergrund. Während die biochemische und bildgeben­ de Diagnostik eine immer präzisere Be­ schreibung potenzieller Prognoseparame­ ter erlaubt, ist die prognostische Validität dieser Prognoseparameter weitgehend un­ bekannt. Deshalb ist die Frage nach der Entscheidung für spezifische Therapi­ en, insbesondere die nach der Therapie­ indikation überhaupt bei Frühgebore­ nem an der Grenze der Überlebensfähig­ keit hoch problematisch. Die Ambiguität der Entscheidungssituation wird auch in der neuesten Leitlinie " Frühgeborene an der Grenze der Lebensfähigkeit " [1] deut­ lich und ist wesentlich der Studienlage ei­ nerseits und der Wertgeladenheit der Ent­ scheidung zwischen Maximaltherapie oder Palliation andererseits geschuldet. Prognose als Problemorientierung Jenseits der Tatsache, dass valide prospek­ tive Daten zur Sensitivität, Spezifität und dem positiven prädiktiven Wert einzel­ ner perinataler Befunde zur Vorhersage unterschiedlicher Facetten des Langzeit­ Outcomes fehlen, ist das Vorgehen in der Abstimmung zwischen Behandlungsteams und Familien häufig an prognostische Be­ wertungen gebunden, die weder evident noch trivial sind. Augenscheinlich entsteht an dieser Stelle Raum für Interpretationen, die von Hoffnungen, Befürchtungen und Zweifel getragen sein können, vor allem weil die Prognose gerade für den kleinen Patienten und seine Angehörigen erhebli­ che Bedeutung hat. Sie korreliert mit sozia­ len Werthaltungen, so zu der Frage, inwie­ weit die Kinder in der Lage sein werden, ihr Leben entsprechend der angestrebten sozialen Teilhabe in der Gemeinschaft in Zukunft zu gestalten und welche Teilhabe als unverzichtbar angesehen wird. Hieraus ergibt sich der soziale und kulturelle Um­ gang mit Frühgeburtlichkeit. Allein die Häufigkeit, mit der ein be­ stimmter Verlauf bei einer diagnostizier­ ten Erkrankung beobachtet wurde, ist die Basis einer Prognose. Damit ist sie ein Maß für die Wahrscheinlichkeit, mit der eine bestimmte Entwicklung bei Vorliegen ei­ ner definierten Erkrankung in der Grup­ pe aller an dieser Krankheit Erkrankten eintritt. Die Prognose gibt also eine so ge­ nannte frequente Wahrscheinlichkeit an. Wenn eine wirklich individuelle Dia­ gnose und Voraussage nicht möglich ist, dann ist die Information, an welcher der Arzt sein Handeln und der Patient seinen lebensweltlichen Umgang mit der Krank­ heit ausrichtet, wesentlich unsicherer als dies zunächst erscheint.
    Kinderärztliche Praxis 01/2015; 86(1):16-22.
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: 143 OriginalArticle T he major cause of perinatal and neonatal morbidity and mortality is still from preterm labor and deli-very. Preterm birth before 24 weeks of gesta-tion may be defined as abortion in some centers. Preterm babies with lowest gestational age and birth weight were correlated with the highest risk of fetal death. 1,2 However, survival rates for preterm birth in tertiary cares are high because of the highest level of neonatal intensive care which provides mechanical ventilation and well-trained neonatologists. 3 Siriraj Hospital is the tertiary center where the com-plicated cases are referred for intensive care, therefore the preterm birth rate was high. The trend of preterm delivery in Siriraj Hospital has changed for 9 years. The situation of financial problems, social policy and hospital contract insurance were the major issues for the patients to make a decision of the place for delivery. The advanced technique of assisted reproduction, a high prevalence of complicated pregnancies and other related causes have resulted in the ABSTRACT Objective: To determine the preterm birth rate, neonatal birth weight and causes of early neonatal death at Siriraj Hospital over a 9-year period (2002-2010). Methods: The medical records of preterm birth, threatened preterm labor and neonatal birth weight at Siriraj Hospital from 2002 to 2010 were retrospectively collected and reviewed. The data was analyzed by SPSS version 13. Results: During a 9-year period, 2002-2010, the birth rate decreased steadily from 2002 to 2006, but increased suddenly from 2007 to 2010. The rate of preterm birth was increased steadily from 2004 to 2010 (9.44%-13.70%). The rate of threatened preterm labor was constantly between 6.0 and 8.9%. Among preterm births, low birth weight infants were mostly found except in the year 2003. Early neonatal death was mostly caused from fetal abnormality. The trend of neonatal death from prematurity had continuously declined and there was no early neonatal death from 2008 to 2010. Conclusion: Regarding this 9-year review, the preterm birth rate increased from 2007 to 2010 while premature babies mostly survived.

Full-text (2 Sources)

Download
52 Downloads
Available from
May 21, 2014