Search

Background/objectives: Necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC) is a serious disease linked to prematurity. A variant, NEC totalis, is associated with nearly 100% mortality. There is wide variation in counseling practices for NEC totalis. Our objectives are to determine what treatment options, if any, are offered to families, and which factors influence these decisions., Methods: An anonymous survey was distributed to members of the AAP Sections on Neonatal-Perinatal Medicine and Pediatric Surgery. Data were analyzed utilizing chi-square tests and Spearman correlations, where applicable., Results: In the setting of NEC totalis, 90% of the 378 respondents viewed offering life-sustaining interventions (LSI) as ethically permissible and 87% felt that transfer to another center willing to provide LSI should be considered; however, only 43% reported offering LSI to families., Conclusions: Management of NEC totalis remains challenging and significant practice variability persists. Most respondents do not offer ongoing medical/surgical management, despite believing it is an ethically permissible option.

Investigators have recently described successful use of an EXTrauterine Environment for Neonatal Development (EXTEND), essentially an artificial womb, to maintain extremely premature fetal lambs ex utero for up to 4 weeks, supporting normal growth and development. The animals were maintained in a fluid environment (Biobag) while nutrition and gas exchange were supported via umbilical catheters and the use of an external membrane oxygenator. The lambs studied correspond to humans at 23-25 weeks' gestation, which is the target range for proposed clinical trials. This new technology offers the possibility of improving outcomes in a patient population with a high rate of mortality and morbidity. However, if safety and efficacy are adequately demonstrated in the lamb model, there remain important ethical considerations worthy of discussion prior to human trials. Moreover, the authors state there is no intention to use EXTEND on patients below the current limit of viability, but this possibility should nevertheless be considered, and should also be the subject of ethical discussion. Analysis of relevant ethical issues, including patient selection, moral status, rights, obligations, and others should precede use of this promising technology in humans.

Context: Health care professionals (HCPs) are crucial to physician-assisted death (PAD) provision., Objectives: To quantitatively assess the favorability of justifications for or against PAD legalization among HCPs, the effect of the terms "suicide" and "euthanasia" on their views and their support for three forms of PAD., Methods: Our questionnaire presented three cases: physician-assisted suicide, euthanasia for a competent patient, and euthanasia for an incompetent patient with an advance directive for euthanasia. Respondents judged whether each case was ethical and should be legal and selected their justifications from commonly cited reasons. The sample included physician clinicians, researchers, nonphysician clinicians, and other nonclinical staff at a major academic medical center., Results: Of 221 HCPs, the majority thought that each case was ethical and should be legal. In order of declining favorability, justifications supporting PAD legalization were relief of suffering, right to die, mercy, acceptance of death, nonabandonment, and saving money for the health care system; opposing justifications were the slippery slope argument, unnecessary due to palliative care, killing patients is wrong, religious views, and suicide is wrong. The use of suicide and euthanasia terminology did not affect responses. Participants preferred physician-assisted suicide to euthanasia for a competent patient (P < 0.0001) and euthanasia for an incompetent patient to euthanasia for a competent patient (P < 0.005)., Conclusions: HCPs endorsed patient-centered justifications over other reasons, including role-specific duties. Suicide and euthanasia language did not bias HCPs against PAD, challenging claims that such value-laden terms hinder dialogue. More research is required to understand the significance of competency in shaping attitudes toward PAD., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Parental counseling becomes complex when considering the use of emerging technologies, especially if it is unclear whether the level of evidence is sufficient to transform the proposed therapy into accepted practice. This paper addresses ethical issues underlying medical decision-making and counseling in the setting of emerging treatments, when long-term outcomes are still in the process of being fully validated. We argue that the ethical transition of emerging technologies, ideally from ethically impermissible to permissible, to obligatory, depends primarily on two factors: outcome data (or prognosis) and treatment feasibility. To illustrate these points, we will use intestinal transplant for short bowel syndrome (SBS) as a specific example. After reviewing the data, this paper will identify the ethical justifications for both comfort care only and intestinal transplant in patients with ultra SBS, and argue that both are ethically permissible, but neither is obligatory. The approach outlined will not only be valuable as ultra SBS outcomes data continue to change, but will also be applicable to other novel therapies as they emerge in perinatal medicine.

Institutional Ethics Committees are commonly available in hospitals with newborn intensive care units, and may serve as a valuable resource for staff and parents dealing with difficult ethical decisions. Many clinicians may be unaware of when the committee might be helpful, or how it functions. After a brief historical introduction, two cases are presented as illustrations of pediatric ethics committee function. The first involves consideration of cardiac surgery for an infant with ventricular septal defect and Trisomy 13. The second involves disagreement between staff and parents regarding possible provision of cardio-pulmonary resuscitation in a terminally ill newborn. Principles and considerations often brought to bear in committee deliberations are reviewed for each case. Neonatologists, staff and families should be aware of this potentially valuable resource, and are encouraged to use it for situations of moral distress, conflict resolution or ethical uncertainty.

Objective: To explore how neonates with respiratory failure are selected for extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) once severity of illness criteria are met, and to determine how conflicts between ECMO providers and parents over the initiation of ECMO are addressed., Study Design: A cross-sectional study was conducted using a data collection survey, which was sent to the directors of neonatal respiratory ECMO centers., Result: The lowest birth weight and gestational age at which respondents would consider placing a neonate on ECMO were frequently below recommended thresholds. There was wide variability in respondents' willingness to place neonates on ECMO in the presence of conditions such as intraventricular hemorrhage and hypoxic ischemic encephalopathy. The number of respondents who would never seek to override parental refusal of ECMO was equal to the number who would always do so., Conclusion: Significant variability exists in the selection criteria for neonatal ECMO and in how conflicts with parents over the provision of ECMO are resolved.

Potential conflict exists when parents refuse a medical intervention for their child that the physician feels obligated to provide. For the anticipated delivery of a preterm newborn, this conflict might exist if the parents refuse resuscitation. At borderline viability, most neonatologists are likely to respect the parents' wishes. However, there will be some gestational age threshold above which the physician will feel compelled to resuscitate despite parental refusal, and will be ethically justified in doing so. The location of that threshold should be determined by the application of sound ethical reasoning, rather than relying on habit or arbitrary standards. That reasoning should include an honest assessment of the benefits and burdens to the child, short-term and long-term, of attempted resuscitation, made in light of relevant mortality and morbidity data. However, a rational analysis will also require consideration of whether the patient's best interest standard should be strictly applied, or whether the interests of others, such as family members, should also be taken into account.

Most neonatologists believe there is a minimal gestational age, below which it is appropriate to refuse to provide resuscitation or intensive care. Determination of this threshold should involve knowledge of the outcome data, but also an understanding of the potential for misuse of these data. In particular, there is a risk of deception, of the parents and of ourselves, due to the uncertainty of the true gestational age, and the "self-fulfilling prophecy" that may occur when a center refuses to try below a certain gestational age because they have had no survivors below that age. Finally, any refusal to treat requires ethical justification. Concepts such as futility and patient's best interest should play a role in the determination of the gestational age threshold, applied in light of the data's inherent weaknesses., (Journal of Perinatology (2005) 25, 685-689. doi:10.1038/sj.jp.7211395.)

Antenatal exposure to corticosteroids is known to increase the pulmonary compliance of preterm animals. We wished to determine whether this was due solely to alteration in lung surfactant content. Rabbit does were injected with either vehicle alone or betamethasone on days 25 and 26 of gestation. Fetuses were delivered at 27 days and given either 50% lactated Ringer's or intratracheal natural surfactant prior to their first breath. Fetuses were mechanically ventilated at a tidal volume of 12 ml/kg for 60 min with periodic compliance measurements. Following ventilation an alveolar lavage was collected for phosphatidylcholine determination. Some fetuses did not undergo ventilation but had saline compliance studies instead. Fetuses given intratracheal surfactant had a higher dynamic compliance than fetuses exposed to antenatal corticosteroids (0.55 +/- 0.01 versus 0.48 +/- 0.02 ml/cm H2O/kg, respectively). Fetuses exposed to antenatal corticosteroids and given intratracheal surfactant had a dynamic compliance (0.66 +/- 0.02) that was greater than those exposed to either single therapy. This was found despite an alveolar surfactant content equal to that in fetuses receiving intratracheal surfactant alone. Saline compliance at birth was significantly greater for fetuses exposed antenatally to steroids. These data imply the existence of a nonsurfactant mechanism by which antenatal corticosteroids increase fetal pulmonary compliance.