OBJECTIVES: • To assess the benefits and risks of stopping compared to continuing feed management before, during, and after blood transfusion in preterm infants • To assess the effects of stopping versus continuing feeds in the following subgroups of infants: infants of different gestations; infants with symptomatic and asymptomatic anaemia; infants who received different feeding schedules, types of feed, and methods of feed delivery; infants who were transfused with different blood products, at different blood volumes, via different routes of delivery; and those who received blood transfusion with and without co-interventions such as use of diuretics • To determine the effectiveness and safety of stopping feeds around the time of a blood transfusion in reducing the risk of subsequent necrotising enterocolitis (NEC) in preterm infants SEARCH METHODS: We used the standard search strategy of Cochrane Neonatal to search the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2018, Issue 11), in the Cochrane Library; MEDLINE (1966 to 14 November 2018); Embase (1980 to 14 November 2018); and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL; 1982 to 14 November 2018). We also searched clinical trials databases, conference proceedings, and reference lists of retrieved articles for randomised controlled trials (RCTs), cluster-RCTs, and quasi-RCTs.
SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials that compared stopping feeds versus continuing feeds around the time of blood transfusion in preterm infants.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected trials, assessed trial quality, and extracted data from the included studies.
MAIN RESULTS: The search revealed seven studies that assessed effects of stopping feeds during blood transfusion. However, only one RCT involving 22 preterm infants was eligible for inclusion in the review. This RCT had low risk of selection bias but high risk of performance bias, as care personnel were not blinded to the study allocation. The primary objective of this trial was to investigate changes in mesenteric blood flow, and no cases of NEC were reported in any of the infants included in the trial. We were unable to draw any conclusions from this single study. The overall GRADE rating for quality of evidence was very low.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Randomised controlled trial evidence is insufficient to show whether stopping feeds has an effect on the incidence of subsequent NEC or death. Large, adequately powered RCTs are needed to address this issue.
METHODS: Anonymous questionnaires to assess practices on feeding, nutrition management and post-natal growth monitoring of tSGA infants were distributed among health-care professionals (HCPs) participating in regional/local perinatology symposia in Malaysia, Thailand and Singapore.
RESULTS: Three hundred seventy-seven respondents from Malaysia (37%), Thailand (27%), Singapore (18%) and other Asian countries (19%) participated in the survey. Respondents were neonatologists (35%), paediatricians (25%) and other HCPs (40%) including nurses and midwives. Exclusive human milk feeding was reported the most preferred feeding option for tSGA infants, followed by fortified human milk feeding (60% and 20%, respectively). This was consistent among the different countries. The perceived nutrient requirements of tSGA infants varied between countries. Most respondents from Malaysia and Singapore reported requirements to be similar to preterm infants, while the majority from Thailand reported that it was less than those of preterm infants. The World Health Organization Growth Chart of 2006 and Fenton Growth Charts of 2013 were the most frequently used charts for growth monitoring in the hospital and after discharge.
CONCLUSIONS: Nutrition management and perceived nutrient requirements for tSGA infants among practising HCPs in Southeast Asia showed considerable variation. The impetus to form standardised and evidence based feeding regimens is important as adequate nutritional management and growth monitoring particularly in this population of infants will have long term impact on population health.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The U5M surveillance data from 2015 to 2017 was retrieved for Malaysian cases of stillbirths and neonatal deaths with multiple pregnancies as exclusion. Stillbirth and neonatal death cases were analysed descriptively for socio-demographic and clinical characteristics. Logistic regressions were performed to identify the associated factors.
RESULTS: There were 15,444 cases selected for analysis, of which 55% of stillbirths and 45% of neonatal deaths. There were 21% of preventable deaths (U5M) and the major contributing causes of preventable stillbirths and neonatal deaths were classified as perinatal death (82.5%), infectious and parasitic diseases (4.1%) and congenital malformations (3.5%). The birth weight (aOR 6.03, 95% CI: 4.14-8.79), hypertensive mother (aOR 1.88, 95% CI: 1.66-2.12) and instrumental delivery (aOR 1.64, 95% CI: 1.16-2.31) were significantly associated with preventable stillbirths and neonatal deaths. Higher household income (>RM3000 per month) was noted as a protective factor (aOR 0.79, 95% CI:0.69,0.89). Mothers with ethnicities other thanBumiputera, single mothers and housewives were identified as the group of mothers with higher odds of poor perinatal services. Among the 3242 cases of preventable stillbirths and neonatal deaths with a complete documented level of adequacy and quality of healthcare, the most frequently identified factors were due to insufficient antenatal care (ANC) (20.4%), non-compliance with medical advice (12.3%) and unsuitable place of delivery (8.6%).
CONCLUSION: Increasing trend of preventable stillbirths and neonatal deaths was noted over 3 years (2015-2017), and one-fifth was related to insufficient ANC service-related factors. Remedial measures in improving the quality of ANC services with an emphasis on the targeted high-risk maternal socio-demographic group (other Bumiputera, older antenatal mothers, nonmarried, poor family income neglected family) and enhancing ANC competency skills among the healthcare provider through adequate training are required to decrease preventable stillbirths and neonatal deaths in Malaysia.
CASE PRESENTATION: Herein, we report a case of very severe hypertriglyceridemia 32 mmol/L (2834 mg/dL) detected incidentally at three months old in an otherwise well boy born late preterm with intrauterine growth restriction, when he presented with lipaemic plasma. He was later diagnosed with CLS. No pathogenic mutations were found for hypertriglyceridemia, and no secondary causes could explain his very severe hypertriglyceridemia.
CONCLUSIONS: The very severe hypertriglyceridemia in this case may appear to be a serious presentation of an unrecognised clinical feature of CLS, further expanding its phenotype.
METHODOLOGY: This was a retrospective cohort study that included 170 newborns admitted to the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU) of Hospital Universiti Sains Malaysia (HUSM) with a history of maternal hyperthyroidism from January 2013 until December 2018. We analyzed their baseline demographic and clinical characteristics, maternal thyroid status and antibody levels. Finally, we analyzed newborn thyroid function and thyroid antibodies.
RESULTS: The proportion of neonates born to mothers with maternal hyperthyroidism was 0.8% (170 of 20,198 neonates within the study period). Seven (4.1%) developed overt hyperthyroidism, while four (2.4%) had thyroid storm. The median time for thyroid function test normalization was 30 days (95% CI: 27.1 to 32.8). The median time for TFT normalization was longer among neonates of mothers with positive thyroid antibodies [46.6 days (95% CI, 20.6 to 39.4)] and of mothers who received anti-thyroid treatment [31.7 days (95% CI, 23.5 to 39.9)].
CONCLUSION: Neonates born to mothers with hyperthyroidism is uncommon. These babies were observed to have a longer time for normalization of thyroid function tests if their mothers had thyroid antibodies or received anti-thyroid treatment.
OBJECTIVES: To compare the effectiveness, acceptability, and consequences of routine vaginal examinations compared with other methods, or different timings, to assess labour progress at term.
SEARCH METHODS: For this update, we searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Trials Register (which includes trials from CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and conference proceedings) and ClinicalTrials.gov (28 February 2021). We also searched the reference lists of retrieved studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of vaginal examinations compared with other methods of assessing labour progress and studies assessing different timings of vaginal examinations. Quasi-RCTs and cluster-RCTs were eligible for inclusion. We excluded cross-over trials and conference abstracts.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed all studies identified by the search for inclusion in the review. Four review authors independently extracted data. Two review authors assessed risk of bias and certainty of the evidence using GRADE.
MAIN RESULTS: We included four studies that randomised a total of 755 women, with data analysed for 744 women and their babies. Interventions used to assess labour progress were routine vaginal examinations, routine ultrasound assessments, routine rectal examinations, routine vaginal examinations at different frequencies, and vaginal examinations as indicated. We were unable to conduct meta-analysis as there was only one study for each comparison. All studies were at high risk of performance bias due to difficulties with blinding. We assessed two studies as high risk of bias and two as low or unclear risk of bias for other domains. The overall certainty of the evidence assessed using GRADE was low or very low. Routine vaginal examinations versus routine ultrasound to assess labour progress (one study, 83 women and babies) Study in Turkey involving multiparous women with spontaneous onset of labour. Routine vaginal examinations may result in a slight increase in pain compared to routine ultrasound (mean difference -1.29, 95% confidence interval (CI) -2.10 to -0.48; one study, 83 women, low certainty evidence) (pain measured using a visual analogue scale (VAS) in reverse: zero indicating 'worst pain', 10 indicating no pain). The study did not assess our other primary outcomes: positive birth experience; augmentation of labour; spontaneous vaginal birth; chorioamnionitis; neonatal infection; admission to neonatal intensive care unit (NICU). Routine vaginal examinations versus routine rectal examinations to assess labour progress (one study, 307 women and babies) Study in Ireland involving women in labour at term. We assessed the certainty of the evidence as very low. Compared with routine rectal examinations, routine vaginal examinations may have little or no effect on: augmentation of labour (risk ratio (RR) 1.03, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.68; one study, 307 women); and spontaneous vaginal birth (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.06; one study, 307 women). We found insufficient data to fully assess: neonatal infections (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.01 to 8.07; one study, 307 babies); and admission to NICU (RR 1.32, 95% CI 0.47 to 3.73; one study, 307 babies). The study did not assess our other primary outcomes: positive birth experience; chorioamnionitis; maternal pain. Routine four-hourly vaginal examinations versus routine two-hourly examinations (one study, 150 women and babies) UK study involving primiparous women in labour at term. We assessed the certainty of the evidence as very low. Compared with routine two-hourly vaginal examinations, routine four-hourly vaginal examinations may have little or no effect, with data compatible with both benefit and harm, on: augmentation of labour (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.60 to 1.57; one study, 109 women); and spontaneous vaginal birth (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.26; one study, 150 women). The study did not assess our other primary outcomes: positive birth experience; chorioamnionitis; neonatal infection; admission to NICU; maternal pain. Routine vaginal examinations versus vaginal examinations as indicated (one study, 204 women and babies) Study in Malaysia involving primiparous women being induced at term. We assessed the certainty of the evidence as low. Compared with vaginal examinations as indicated, routine four-hourly vaginal examinations may result in more women having their labour augmented (RR 2.55, 95% CI 1.03 to 6.31; one study, 204 women). There may be little or no effect on: • spontaneous vaginal birth (RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.59; one study, 204 women); • chorioamnionitis (RR 3.06, 95% CI 0.13 to 74.21; one study, 204 women); • neonatal infection (RR 4.08, 95% CI 0.46 to 35.87; one study, 204 babies); • admission to NICU (RR 2.04, 95% CI 0.63 to 6.56; one study, 204 babies). The study did not assess our other primary outcomes of positive birth experience or maternal pain.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Based on these findings, we cannot be certain which method is most effective or acceptable for assessing labour progress. Further large-scale RCT trials are required. These should include essential clinical and experiential outcomes. This may be facilitated through the development of a tool to measure positive birth experiences. Data from qualitative studies are also needed to fully assess whether methods to evaluate labour progress meet women's needs for a safe and positive labour and birth, and if not, to develop an approach that does.
OBJECTIVES: To determine if prophylactic nasal CPAP commenced soon after birth regardless of respiratory status in the very preterm or very low birth weight infant reduces the use of IPPV and the incidence of chronic lung disease (CLD) without adverse effects.
SEARCH STRATEGY: The search was updated in April 2005. The standard search strategy of the Neonatal Review Group was used. This included searches of the Oxford Database of Perinatal Trials, Cochrane Library Issue 1 2005, MEDLINE 1966-April 2005, previous reviews including cross references, abstracts, conferences, symposia, proceedings, expert informants, journal hand searching mainly in the English language.
SELECTION CRITERIA: All trials using random or quasi-random patient allocation of very preterm infants < 32 weeks gestation and / or < 1500 gms at birth were eligible. Comparison had to be between prophylactic nasal CPAP commencing soon after birth regardless of the respiratory status of the infant compared with "standard" methods of treatment where CPAP or IPPV is used for a defined respiratory condition.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Standard methods of the Cochrane Collaboration and its Neonatal Review Group, including independent assessment of trial quality and extraction of data by each author, were used. Data were analysed using relative risk (RR). Meta-analysis was performed using a fixed effects model.
MAIN RESULTS: There are no statistically significant differences in any of the outcomes studied in either of the eligible trials (Han 1987; Sandri 2004) reporting on 82 and 230 infants respectively. In Han 1987 there are trends towards increases in the incidence of BPD at 28 days [RR 2.27 (0.77, 6.65)], death [RR 3.63 (0.42, 31.08)] and any IVH [RR 2.18 (0.84, 5.62)] in the CPAP group. In Sandri 2004 there is a trend towards an increase in IVH grade 3 or 4 [RR 3.0 (0.96, 28.42)] in the CPAP group. No outcome was significantly different in any of the meta-analyses.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is currently insufficient information to evaluate the effectiveness of prophylactic nasal CPAP in very preterm infants. Neither of the included studies reviewed showed evidence of benefit in reducing the use of IPPV. The tendency for some adverse outcomes to be increased is of concern and further multicentre randomized controlled trials are needed to clarify this.