Non-radiologist-performed abdominal point-of-care ultrasonography in paediatrics — a scoping review

Background - Historically, US in the paediatric setting has mostly been the domain of radiologists. However, in the last decade, there has been an uptake of non-radiologist point-of-care US. Objective - To gain an overview of abdominal non-radiologist point-of-care US in paediatrics. Materials and methods - We conducted a scoping review regarding the uses of abdominal non-radiologist point-of-care US, quality of examinations and training, patient perspective, financial costs and legal consequences following the use of non-radiologist point-of-care US. We conducted an advanced search of the following databases: Medline, Embase and Web of Science Conference Proceedings. We included published original research studies describing abdominal non-radiologist point-of-care US in children. We limited studies to English-language articles from Western countries. Results - We found a total of 5,092 publications and selected 106 publications for inclusion: 39 studies and 51 case reports or case series on the state-of-art of abdominal non-radiologist point-of-care US, 14 on training of non-radiologists, and 1 each on possible harms following non-radiologist point-of-care US and patient satisfaction. According to included studies, non-radiologist point-of-care US is increasingly used, but no standardised training guidelines exist. We found no studies regarding the financial consequences of non-radiologist point-of-care US. Conclusion - This scoping review supports the further development of non-radiologist point-of-care US and underlines the need for consensus on who can do which examination after which level of training among US performers. More research is needed on training non-radiologists and on the costs-to-benefits of non-radiologist point-of-care US

Progesterone for prevention of preterm birth in women with short cervical length : 2-year infant outcomes

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The Triple P study is registered as NL1961. https://www.trialregister.nl/trial/1961 The original Triple P study was funded by ZonMW number 120620030. The follow-up study was funded by the Amsterdam UMC, Academic Medical Center. BWM is supported by a NHMRC Investigatorgrant (GNT1176437). BWM reports consultancy for ObsEva, Merck Merck KGaA, iGenomix and Guerbet.Peer reviewedPublisher PD

TIPIT: A randomised controlled trial of thyroxine in preterm infants under 28 weeks' gestation

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Infants born at extreme prematurity (below 28 weeks' gestation) are at high risk of developmental disability. A major risk factor for disability is having a low level of thyroid hormone which is recognised to be a frequent phenomenon in these infants. At present it is unclear whether low levels of thyroid hormone are a cause of disability, or a consequence of concurrent adversity.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We propose an explanatory multi-centre double blind randomised controlled trial of thyroid hormone supplementation in babies born below 28 weeks' gestation. All infants will receive either levothyroxine or placebo until 32 weeks' corrected gestational age. The primary outcome will be brain growth. This will be assessed by the width of the sub-arachnoid space measured using cranial ultrasound and head circumference at 36 weeks' corrected gestational. The secondary outcomes will be (a) thyroid hormone concentrations measured at increasing postnatal age, (b) status of the hypothalamic pituitary axis, (c) auxological data between birth and 36 weeks' corrected gestational age, (d) thyroid gland volume, (e) volumes of brain structures (measured by magnetic resonance imaging), (f) determination of the extent of myelination and white matter integrity (measured by diffusion weighted MRI) and brain vessel morphology (measured by magnetic resonance angiography) at expected date of delivery and (g) markers of morbidity including duration of mechanical ventilation and chronic lung disease.</p> <p>We will also examine how activity of the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis modulates the effects of thyroid supplementation. This will contribute to decisions about which confounding variables to assess in large-scale studies.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p>Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN89493983</p

Increasing illness severity in very low birth weight infants over a 9-year period

BACKGROUND: Recent reports have documented a leveling-off of survival rates in preterm infants through the 1990's. The objective of this study was to determine temporal changes in illness severity in very low birth weight (VLBW) infants in relationship to the outcomes of death and/or severe IVH. METHODS: Cohort study of 1414 VLBW infants cared for in a single level III neonatal intensive care unit in Delaware from 1993–2002. Infants were divided into consecutive 3-year cohorts. Illness severity was measured by two objective methods: the Score for Neonatal Acute Physiology (SNAP), based on data from the 1(st )day of life, and total thyroxine (T(4)), measured on the 5(th )day of life. Death before hospital discharge and severe intraventricular hemorrhage (IVH) were investigated in the study sample in relation to illness severity. The fetal death rate was also investigated. Statistical analyses included both univariate and multivariate analysis. RESULTS: Illness severity, as measured by SNAP and T(4, )increased steadily over the 9-year study period with an associated increase in severe IVH and the combined outcome of death and/or severe IVH. During the final 3 years of the study, the observed increase in illness severity accounted for 86% (95% CI 57–116%) of the variability in the increase in death and/or severe IVH. The fetal death rate dropped from 7.8/1000 (1993–1996) to 5.3/1000 (1999–2002, p = .01) over the course of the study. CONCLUSION: These data demonstrate a progressive increase in illness in VLBW infants over time, associated with an increase in death and/or severe IVH. We speculate that the observed decrease in fetal death, and the increase in neonatal illness, mortality and/or severe IVH over time represent a shift of severely compromised patients that now survive the fetal time period and are presented for care in the neonatal unit

Amnioinfusion Compared With No Intervention in Women With Second-Trimester Rupture of Membranes A Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effectiveness of amnioinfusion in women with second-trimester preterm prelabor rupture of membranes. METHODS: We performed a nationwide, multicenter, open-label, randomized controlled trial, the PPROM: Expectant Management versus Induction of Labor-III (PPROMEXIL-III) trial, in women with singleton pregnancies and preterm prelabor rupture of membranes at 16 0/7 to 24 0/7 weeks of gestation with oligohydramnios (single deepest pocket less than 20 mm). Participants were allocated to transabdominal amnioinfusion or no intervention in a oneto- one ratio by a web-based system. If the single deepest pocket was less than 20 mm on follow-up visits, amnioinfusion was repeated weekly until 28 0/7 weeks of gestation. The primary outcome was perinatal mortality. We needed 56 women to show a reduction in perinatal mortality from 70% to 35% (b error 0.20, two-sided a error 0.05). RESULTS: Between June 15, 2012, and January 13, 2016, we randomized 28 women to amnioinfusion and 28 to no intervention. One woman was enrolled before the trial registration date (June 19, 2012). Perinatal mortality rates were 18 of 28 (64%) in the amnioinfusion group vs 21 of 28 (75%) in the no intervention group (relative risk 0.86, 95% CI 0.601.22, P5.39). CONCLUSION: In women with second-trimester preterm prelabor rupture of membranes and oligohydramnios, we found no reduction in perinatal mortality after amnioinfusion

Phase-rectified signal averaging method to predict perinatal outcome in infants with very preterm fetal growth restriction- a secondary analysis of TRUFFLE-trial

BACKGROUND: Phase-rectified signal averaging, an innovative signal processing technique, can be used to investigate quasi-periodic oscillations in noisy, nonstationary signals that are obtained from fetal heart rate. Phase-rectified signal averaging is currently the best method to predict survival after myocardial infarction in adult cardiology. Application of this method to fetal medicine has established significantly better identification than with short-term variation by computerized cardiotocography of growth-restricted fetuses. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine the longitudinal progression of phase-rectified signal averaging indices in severely growth-restricted human fetuses and the prognostic accuracy of the technique in relation to perinatal and neurologic outcome. STUDY DESIGN: Raw data from cardiotocography monitoring of 279 human fetuses were obtained from 8 centers that took part in the multicenter European “TRUFFLE” trial on optimal timing of delivery in fetal growth restriction. Average acceleration and deceleration capacities were calculated by phase-rectified signal averaging to establish progression from 5 days to 1 day before delivery and were compared with short-term variation progression. The receiver operating characteristic curves of average acceleration and deceleration capacities and short-term variation were calculated and compared between techniques for short- and intermediate-term outcome. RESULTS: Average acceleration and deceleration capacities and short-term variation showed a progressive decrease in their diagnostic indices of fetal health from the first examination 5 days before delivery to 1 day before delivery. However, this decrease was significant 3 days before delivery for average acceleration and deceleration capacities, but 2 days before delivery for short-term variation. Compared with analysis of changes in short-term variation, analysis of (delta) average acceleration and deceleration capacities better predicted values of Apgar scores <7 and antenatal death (area under the curve for prediction of antenatal death: delta average acceleration capacity, 0.62 [confidence interval, 0.19–1.0]; delta short-term variation, 0.54 [confidence interval, 0.13–0.97]; P=.006; area under the curve for prediction Apgar <7: average deceleration capacity <24 hours before delivery, 0.64 [confidence interval, 0.52–0.76]; short-term variation <24 hours before delivery, 0.53 [confidence interval, 0.40–0.65]; P=.015). Neither phase-rectified signal averaging indices nor short-term variation showed predictive power for developmental disability at 2 years of age (Bayley developmental quotient, <95 or <85). CONCLUSIONS: The phase-rectified signal averaging method seems to be at least as good as short-term variation to monitor progressive deterioration of severely growth-restricted fetuses. Our findings suggest that for short-term outcomes such as Apgar score, phase-rectified signal averaging indices could be an even better test than short-term variation. Overall, our findings confirm the possible value of prospective trials based on phase-rectified signal averaging indices of autonomic nervous system of severely growth-restricted fetuses

Long-term health-related and economic consequences of short-term outcomes in evaluation of perinatal interventions

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Many perinatal interventions are performed to improve long-term neonatal outcome. To evaluate the long-term effect of a perinatal intervention follow-up of the child after discharge from the hospital is necessary because serious sequelae from perinatal complications frequently manifest themselves only after several years. However, long-term follow-up is time-consuming, is not in the awareness of obstetricians, is expensive and falls outside the funding-period of most obstetric studies. Consequently, short-term outcomes are often reported instead of the primary long-term end-point. With this project, we will assess the current state of affairs concerning follow-up after obstetric RCTs and we will develop multivariable prediction models for different long-term health outcomes. Furthermore, we would like to encourage other researchers participating in follow-up studies after large obstetric trials (> 350 women) to inform us about their studies so that we can include their follow-up study in our systematic review. We would invite these researchers also to join our effort and to collaborate with us on the external validation of our prediction models.</p> <p>Methods/Design</p> <p>A systematic review of neonatal follow-up after obstetric studies will be performed. All reviews of the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth group will be assessed for reviews on interventions that aimed to improve neonatal outcome. Reviews on interventions primary looking at other aspects than neonatal outcome such as labour progress will also be included when these interventions can change the outcome of the neonate on the short or long-term. Our review will be limited to RCTs with more than 350 women. Information that will be extracted from these RCTs will address whether, how and for how long follow-up has been performed. However, in many cases long-term follow-up of the infants will not be feasible. An alternative solution to limited follow-up could be to develop prediction models to estimate long-term health outcomes of the newborn based on specific perinatal outcomes and other covariates. For the development of multivariable prediction models for several health outcomes, we will use data available from a Dutch cohort study of preterm (< 32 weeks) and/or small for gestational age infants (< 1500 g). These infants were born in The Netherlands in 1983 and followed until they reached the age of 19.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>The systematic review will provide insight in the extent and methods used for follow-up assessments after obstetric RCTs in the past. The prediction models can be used by future studies to extrapolate short-term outcomes to a long-term horizon or to indicate for which neonates long-term follow-up is required, as their outcomes (either absence or presence of sequelae) cannot be adequately predicted from short-term outcomes and clinical background characteristics.</p

Atosiban versus placebo in the treatment of threatened preterm birth between 30 and 34 weeks gestation: Study protocol of the 4-year APOSTEL 8 follow-up

Introduction Currently, the majority of women worldwide with threatened preterm birth are treated with tocolytics. Although tocolytics can effectively delay birth for 48 hours, no tocolytic drug has convincingly been shown to improve neonatal outcomes and effects on long-term child development are unknown. The aim of this follow-up study of a placebo controlled randomised trial is to investigate the long-term effects of atosiban administration in case of threatened preterm birth on child's neurodevelopment and behaviour development, overall health and mortality. Methods and analysis This protocol concerns a follow-up study of the multicentre randomised double-blind placebo controlled APOSTEL 8 trial (NL61439.018.17, EudraCT-number 2017-001007-72). In this trial, women with threatened preterm birth (between 30 and 34 weeks of gestation) defined as uterine contractions with (1) a cervical length of <15 mm or (2) a cervical length of 15-30 mm and a positive fibronectin test or (3) in centres where cervical length measurement is not part of the local protocol: a positive fibronectin test or Actim-Partus test or (4) ruptured membranes, are randomised to atosiban or placebo for 48 hours. The primary outcome is a composite of perinatal mortality and severe neonatal morbidity. Children born to mothers who participated in the APOSTEL 8 study (n=760) will be eligible for follow-up at 4 years of corrected age and assessed using four parent-reported questionnaires. Primary outcomes are neurodevelopment and behaviour problems. Secondary outcomes are on child growth and general health. All outcomes will be compared between the atosiban and placebo group with OR and corresponding 95% CI. Analyses will be performed using the intention-to-treat approach. Ethics and dissemination The Medical Research Ethics Committee from Amsterdam UMC confirmed that de Medical Research Involving Human Subjects Act (Dutch WMO-law) did not apply to our study (W21_386 # 21.431). Results will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and shared with stakeholders and participants. This protocol is published before analysis of the results