Search

Most clinicians rely on outcome data based on completed weeks of gestational of fetal maturity for antenatal and postnatal counseling, especially for preterm infants born at the margins of viability. Contemporary estimation of gestational maturity, based on ultrasounds, relies on the use of first-trimester scans, which offer an accuracy of ±3–7 days, and depend on the timing of the scans and the measurements used in the calculations. Most published literature on the outcomes of babies born prematurely have reported on short- and long-term outcomes based on completed gestational weeks of fetal maturity at birth. These outcome data change significantly from one week to the next, especially around the margin of gestational viability. With a change in approach solely from decisions based on survival, to disability-free survival and long-term functional outcomes, the complexity of the parental and care provider’s decision-making in the perinatal and postnatal period for babies born at less than 25 weeks gestation remains challenging. While sustaining life following birth at the margins of viability remains our priority—identifying and mitigating risks associated with extremely preterm birth begins in the perinatal period. The challenge of supporting the normal maturation of these babies postnatally has far-reaching consequences and depends on our ability to sustain life while optimizing growth, nutrition, and the repair of organs compromised by the consequences of preterm birth. This article aims to explore the ethical and medical complexities of contemporary decision-making in the perinatal and postnatal periods. We identify gaps in our current knowledge of this topic and suggest areas for future research, while offering a perspective for future collaborative decision-making and care for babies born at the margins of viability. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: To compare composite outcomes of neonatal mortality or morbidity using a split-week gestational age (GA) model to completed weeks GA maturity at 23-26 weeks gestation.Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study of infants born at 23-26 weeks GA. Outcomes using a split-week GA model defined as early (X, 0-3) and late (X, 4-6) with X being 23-26 weeks GA were compared to outcomes using completed weeks GA, with a similar comparison between the late split of the preceding week (X, 4-6) and early split of the subsequent week (X + 1, 0-3).Results: A total of 1345 infants were included in the study. Statistically significant differences were noted in outcomes between the early and late split of the gestational week at 24 (early vs late, 85.6% vs 73.0%), 25 (69.6% vs 56.6%) and 26 weeks (55.9% vs 37.4%), but not at 23 weeks GA (95.2% vs 94.5%). No statistically significant differences were noted between the late vs early part of the subsequent week (23, 4-6) vs (24, 0-3), and (24, 4-6) vs (25, 0-3) GA.Conclusion: Neonatal outcome estimates using a split week model differs from that based on the use of completed weeks of gestational maturity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Extremely premature infants are susceptible to fluctuations in cerebral blood flow due to immaturity of cerebral autoregulation. Inotropes may cause rapid changes to systemic blood pressure and consequently cerebral blood flow, especially within the first 72 hours of life. This period is recognized to carry the greatest risk for cerebral hemorrhage. This study evaluates the incidence of death and/or severe brain injury in extremely preterm infants treated with inotropes in the first 72 hours of life.Methods: Prospective cohort study of infants born ≤29+0 weeks gestational age (GA) between January 2013 and December 2016. Severe brain injury was defined based on head ultrasound as presence of: grade III or IV intraventricular hemorrhage (IVH), moderate to severe post-hemorrhagic ventricular dilatation (PHVD), or cystic periventricular leukomalacia (cPVL). The association between inotrope use and death and/or brain injury was explored via logistic regression controlling for predefined confounding risk factors.Results: Of 497 eligible infants, 97 (19.5%) received inotropes during the first 72 hours. GA at birth, birth weight (BW), and 5-minute Apgar scores were lower among infants who received early inotropes compared to those not treated with inotropes. A stepwise logistic regression of the predefined confounding factors showed GA, exposure for antenatal steroids, and admission hypothermia to be significant confounding factors. Adjusting for those factors, early use of inotropes was associated with increased risk of death and/or severe brain injury (AOR 4.5; 95%CI: 2.4-8.5), severe brain injury (AOR 4.2; 95% CI: 1.9-8.9), and IVH of any grade (AOR 2.9; 95%CI: 1.7-4.9).Conclusion: Early inotropes use was associated with higher risk of death and/or severe brain injury. Strict indications and strategies for minimizing inotrope use while preventing hypotension should be implemented in the early postnatal care of infants at risk for severe brain injury. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]