Antenatal and perinatal factors influencing neonatal blood pressure: a systematic review

Objective A comprehensive understanding of the factors contributing to perinatal blood pressure is vital to ensure optimal postnatal hemodynamic support. The objective of this study was to review existing literature on maternal and perinatal factors influencing blood pressure in neonates up to 3 months corrected age. Methods A systematic search of published literature in OVID Medline, OVID Embase and the COCHRANE library identified publications relating to maternal factors affecting blood pressure of neonates up to corrected age of 3 months. Summary data were extracted and compared (PROSPERO CRD42018092886). Results Of the 3683 non-duplicate publications identified, 44 were eligible for inclusion in this review. Topics elicited were sociodemographic factors, maternal health status, medications, smoking during pregnancy, and cord management at birth. Limited data were available for each factor. Results regarding the impact of these factors on neonatal blood pressure were inconsistent across studies. Conclusions There is insufficient evidence to draw definitive conclusions regarding the impact of various maternal and perinatal factors on neonatal blood pressure. Future investigations of neonatal cardiovascular therapies should account for these factors in their study design. Similarly, studies on maternal diseases and perinatal interventions should include neonatal blood pressure as part of their primary or secondary analyses

Method of blood pressure measurement in neonates and infants: a systematic review and analysis

Objectives: To determine the recommended blood pressure (BP) measurement methods in neonates after systematically analyzing the international literature regarding proper BP cuff size and measurement location and method. Study Design: A literature search was conducted in MEDLINE, PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library and CINAHL from 1946 to 2017 on BP in neonates < 3 months of age (PROSPERO ID CRD42018092886). Study data was extracted and analyzed with separate analysis of Bland-Altman studies comparing measurement methods. Results: Of 3587 non-duplicate publications identified, 34 were appropriate for inclusion in the analysis. Four studies evaluating BP cuff size support a recommendation for a cuff width to arm circumference ratio of ~0.5. Studies investigating measurement location identified the upper arm as the most accurate and least variable location for oscillometric BP measurement. Analysis of studies using Bland-Altman methods for comparison of intra-arterial to oscillometric BP measurement show that the two methods correlate best for mean arterial pressure (MAP) whereas systolic BP (SBP) by the oscillometric method tends to over-estimate intra-arterial SBP. Compared to intra-arterial methods, SBP, diastolic BP, and MAP by oscillometric methods are less accurate and precise, especially in neonates with a MAP <30mmHg. Conclusions: Proper BP measurement is critical in neonates with naturally lower BP and attention to BP cuff size, location, and method of measurement are essential. With decreasing use of intra-arterial catheters for long term BP monitoring in neonates, further studies are urgently needed to validate and develop oscillometric methodology with enhanced accuracy

Neonatal blood pressure by birth weight, gestational age, and postnatal age: a systematic review

Background Blood pressure is a vital hemodynamic marker during the neonatal period. However, normative values are often derived from small observational studies. Understanding the normative range would help to identify ideal thresholds for intervention to treat hypotension or hypertension. Therefore, the aim of this study was to assess observed blood pressure values in neonates who have not received any blood-pressure modifying treatments from birth to three months postnatal age and whether these vary according to birth weight, gestational age and postnatal age.Methods This was a systematic review. A literature search was conducted in MEDLINE, PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and CINAHL from 1946 to 2017 on blood pressure in neonates from birth to 3 months of age (PROSPERO ID CRD42018092886). Unpublished data were included where appropriate.Results Of 3,587 non-duplicate publications identified, 30 were included (one unpublished study). Twelve studies contained data grouped by birth weight, while 23 contained data grouped by gestational age. Study and clinical heterogeneity precluded meta-analyses thus results are presented by subgroup. A consistent blood pressure rise was associated with increasing birth weight, gestational age, and postnatal age. In addition, blood pressure seemed to rise more rapidly in the most preterm and low birth weight neonates.Conclusion Despite blood pressure increasing with birth weight, gestational age, and postnatal age, there was marked blood pressure variability observed throughout. To better define hypotension and hypertension, future studies should develop consistent approaches for factors related to blood pressure variability, including the method and timing of measurement as well as statistical control of relevant patient characteristics.</p

Development of a neonatal adverse event severity scale through a Delphi consensus approach

BACKGROUND: Assessment of the seriousness, expectedness and causality are necessary for any adverse event (AE) in a clinical trial. In addition, assessing AE severity helps determine the importance of the AE in the clinical setting. Standardisation of AE severity criteria could make safety information more reliable and comparable across trials. Although standardised AE severity scales have been developed in other research fields, they are not suitable for use in neonates. The development of an AE severity scale to facilitate the conduct and interpretation of neonatal clinical trials is therefore urgently needed. METHODS: A stepwise consensus process was undertaken within the International Neonatal Consortium (INC) with input from all relevant stakeholders. The consensus process included several rounds of surveys (based on a Delphi approach), face-to-face meetings and a pilot validation. RESULTS: Neonatal AE severity was classified by five grades (mild, moderate, severe, life threatening or death). AE severity in neonates was defined by the effect of the AE on age appropriate behaviour, basal physiological functions and care changes in response to the AE. Pilot validation of the generic criteria revealed κ=0.23 and guided further refinement. This generic scale was applied to 35 typical and common neonatal AEs resulting in the INC neonatal AE severity scale (NAESS) V.1.0, which is now publicly available. DISCUSSION: The INC NAESS is an ongoing effort that will be continuously updated. Future perspectives include further validation and the development of a training module for users.status: publishe