Percutaneous central venous catheters versus peripheral cannulae for delivery of parenteral nutrition in neonates.

BACKGROUND: Parenteral nutrition for neonates may be delivered via a short peripheral cannula or a central venous catheter. The latter may either be inserted via the umbilicus or percutaneously. Because of the complications associated with umbilical venous catheter use, many neonatal units prefer to use percutaneously inserted catheters following the initial stabilisation period. The method of parenteral nutrition delivery may affect nutrient input and consequently growth and development. Although potentially more difficult to place, percutaneous central venous catheters may be more stable than peripheral cannulae, and need less frequent replacement. These delivery methods may also be associated with different risks of adverse events, including acquired systemic infection and extravasation injury. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effect of infusion via a percutaneous central venous catheter versus a peripheral cannula on nutrient input, growth and development, and complications including systemic infection, or extravasation injuries in newborn infants who require parenteral nutrition. SEARCH STRATEGY: The standard search strategy of the Cochrane Neonatal Review Group was used. This included searches of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, The Cochrane Library, Issue 1, 2007), MEDLINE (1966 - February 2007), EMBASE (1980 - February 2007), conference proceedings, and previous reviews. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials that compared the effect of delivering parenteral nutrition via a percutaneous central venous catheter versus a peripheral cannulae in neonates. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Data were extracted the data using the standard methods of the Cochrane Neonatal Review Group, with separate evaluation of trial quality and data extraction by each author, and synthesis of data using relative risk, risk difference and mean difference. MAIN RESULTS: Four trials eligible for inclusion were found. These trials recruited a total of 368 infants and reported a number of different outcomes. One study showed that the use of a percutaneous central venous catheter was associated with a decreased risk of cumulative nutritional deficit during the trial period: Mean difference in the percentage of the prescribed nutritional intake actually received: -7.1% (95% confidence interval -11.02, -3.2). In another trial, infants in the percutaneous central venous catheter group needed significantly fewer catheters/cannulae per infant during the trial period: Mean difference in the number of catheters/cannulae per infant: -3.2 (95% confidence interval -5.13, -1.27). Meta-analysis of data from all four trials did not find any evidence of an effect on the incidence of systemic infection: Typical relative risk: 0.94 (95% confidence interval 0.70, 1.25); typical risk difference: -0.02 (95% confidence interval -0.12, 0.08). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Data from one small study suggest that the use of a percutaneous central venous catheter to deliver parenteral nutrition in newborn infants improves nutrient input. The significance of this in relation to long-term growth and developmental outcomes is unclear. Another study suggested that the use of a percutaneous central venous catheter rather than a peripheral cannula decreases the number of catheters/cannulae needed to deliver the nutrition. No evidence was found to suggest that percutaneous central venous catheter use increased the risk of adverse events, particularly systemic infection.

Postnatal growth retardation: a universal problem in preterm infants.

BACKGROUND: Previous data from this unit suggest that postnatal growth retardation (PGR) is inevitable in preterm infants. However, the study was performed in a single level III neonatal intensive care unit and applicability of the findings to other level III or level I-II special care baby units was uncertain. OBJECTIVES: To examine postnatal hospital growth and to compare growth outcome in preterm infants discharged from four level III tertiary care units and 10 level I-II special care baby units in the former Northern Region of the United Kingdom. SUBJECTS/METHODS: Preterm infants (< or = 32 weeks gestation; < or = 1500 g) surviving to discharge were studied. Infants were weighed at birth and discharge. Body weight was converted into a z score using the British Foundation Growth Standards. To ascertain the degree of PGR, the z score at birth was subtracted from the z score at discharge. Data were evaluated using a combination of split plot (level III v I-II=main factor; individual centre=subfactor) and stepwise regression analyses. Results were considered significant at p < 0.05. RESULTS: A total of 659 (level III, n = 335; level I-II, n = 324) infants were admitted over a 24 month period (January 1998-December 1999). No differences were detected in birth characteristics, CRIB score (a measure of illness in the first 24 hours of life), length of hospital stay, weight gain, weight at discharge, or degree of PGR between infants discharged from level III and level I-II units. Significant variation was noted in length of hospital stay (approximately 35%; p < 0.001), weight gain (approximately 33%; p < 0.001), weight at discharge (approximately 20%; p < 0.001), and degree of PGR (approximately 200%; p < 0.001) between the level III units. Even greater variability was noted in the duration of hospital stay (approximately 40%; p < 0.001), weight gain (approximately 60%; p < 0.001), weight at discharge (approximately 40%, p < 0.001), and degree of PGR (approximately 300%, p < 0.001) between the level I-II units. CONCLUSIONS: These data stress the variable but universal nature of PGR in preterm infants discharged from level III and I-II neonatal intensive care units and raise important questions about nutritional support of these infants before and after hospital discharge.

Percutaneous central venous catheters versus peripheral cannulae for delivery of parenteral nutrition in neonates.

BACKGROUND: Parenteral nutrition for newborn infants may be delivered via short peripheral cannulae or central venous catheters, which are usually sited percutaneously. The method of delivery may affect nutrient input, and consequently growth and development. Although potentially more difficult to site, percutaneous central venous catheters may be more stable than peripheral cannulae, and need less frequent replacement. These methods may also be associated with different risks of adverse events, including acquired systemic infection and extravasation injury. OBJECTIVES: To review the evidence from randomised controlled trials that, in newborn infants who require parenteral nutrition, infusion via a percutaneous central venous catheter versus a peripheral cannula improves nutrient input, and growth and development, without increasing adverse consequences including systemic infection, or extravasation injuries. SEARCH STRATEGY: We used the standard search strategy of the Cochrane Neonatal Review Group. This included searches of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, The Cochrane Library, Issue 4, 2003), MEDLINE (1966 - October 2003), EMBASE (1980 - October 2003), conference proceedings, and previous reviews. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials that compared the effect of delivering parenteral nutrition via percutaneous central venous catheters versus peripheral cannulae in newborn infants. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We extracted the data using the standard methods of the Cochrane Neonatal Review Group, with separate evaluation of trial quality and data extraction by each author, and synthesis of data using relative risk, risk difference and mean difference. MAIN RESULTS: We found three trials eligible for inclusion. These recruited a total of 262 infants and reported a number of different outcomes. One study showed that the use of a percutaneous central venous catheter was associated with a decreased risk of cumulative nutritional deficit during the trial period: Mean difference in the percentage of the prescribed nutritional intake actually received: -7.1% (95% confidence interval -11.2, -3.2). In another trial, infants in the percutaneous central venous catheter group needed significantly fewer catheters/cannulae per infant during the trial period: Mean difference in the number of catheters/cannulae per infant: -3.2 (95% confidence interval -5.13, -1.27). Meta-analysis of data from two trials did not find any evidence of an effect on the incidence of systemic infection: Typical relative risk: 0.90 (95% confidence interval 0.62, 1.32); typical risk difference: -0.04 (95% confidence interval -0.17, 0.10). REVIEWERS' CONCLUSIONS: Data from one small study suggest that the use of percutaneous central venous catheters to deliver parenteral nutrition in newborn infants improves nutrient input. The significance of this in relation to longer-term growth and developmental outcomes is unclear. Another study suggested that the use of percutaneous central venous catheters rather than peripheral cannulae decreases the number of catheters/cannulae needed to deliver the nutrition. We have not found any evidence that percutaneous central venous catheter use increases the risk of adverse events, particularly systemic infection.

Randomized comparative trial between percutaneous longlines and peripheral cannulae in the delivery of neonatal parenteral nutrition.

UNLABELLED: Percutaneously inserted central venous catheters (CVCs) are frequently used for parenteral nutrition (PN) in neonates. Catheter-related sepsis (CRS) is the most commonly reported complication. The aim of this study was to compare sepsis rates between neonates receiving PN by CVC and by peripheral cannula. Neonates were randomized to receive PN either by CVC or by peripheral cannula. Primary outcomes were sepsis rates and efficacy of PN delivery. Interim analysis (49 neonates) revealed no difference in sepsis rates (CVC group 46%, cannula group 40%, p = 0.57). There was a significant discrepancy in PN delivered (median deficit 3.2% in the CVC group, 10.3% in the cannula group, p=0.0014). After consideration of these findings the study was terminated. CONCLUSION: Because the trial was stopped early, small but clinically important differences in the rates of sepsis may have been missed. Neonates in the cannula group accrued significant deficits of PN owing to a lack of venous access. This may contribute to undernutrition in neonates. CVC can be advocated for PN administration, in that sepsis appears to be no higher than when using cannulae and delivery of nutrition is significantly better.

Animal-derived or synthetic surfactant for the treatment of neonatal respiratory distress syndrome: a review.

Animal-derived surfactants containing SP-B and SP-C are more effective in vitro and in animal models than their synthetic counterparts, but are not as effective as unmodified, naturally occurring surfactant. In clinical trials involving newborn babies with respiratory distress syndrome (RDS) these short-term differences are reflected as improvements in gas exchange and lung function. Treatment with animal-derived surfactants results in fewer air leaks and lower neonatal mortality. The evidence is now strong enough to recommend routine use of animal-derived surfactants in very preterm infants with RDS. The newer generation of synthetic surfactants may be important in the future as they have the advantages of currently available animal products with the addition of better resistance to inactivation.

Pumactant and poractant alfa for treatment of respiratory distress syndrome in neonates born at 25-29 weeks' gestation: a randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Exogenous surfactant preparations vary in their constitution and biophysical properties. Synthetic and animal-derived preparations lower the rate of death compared with controls. No significant differences in mortality or important long-term clinical outcomes have been shown between them in randomised trials. We did a randomised controlled trial to compare pumactant, a synthetic surfactant, with poractant alfa, an animal-derived surfactant, both of which are widely used in the UK. METHODS: We enrolled 212 neonates born between 25 weeks' and 29 weeks and 6 days' gestation who were intubated for presumed surfactant deficiency and were free from life-threatening malformations. We randomly assigned 105 neonates poractant alfa, and 107 pumactant. The primary outcome was duration of high-dependency care and mortality was a secondary outcome. Analysis was by intention to treat. FINDINGS: Outcome data were analysed for 199 babies. The trial was stopped on the recommendation of the data and safety monitoring committee because mortality assumed a greater importance than the primary outcome. Predischarge mortality differed significantly between groups, in favour of poractant alfa (14.1 vs 31.0%, p=0.006; odds ratio 0.37 [95% CI 0.18-0.76). This difference was sustained after adjustment for centre, gestation, birthweight, sex, plurality, and use of antenatal steroids. INTERPRETATION: Mortality was unexpectedly lower among neonates who received poractant alfa than among those who received pumactant, and was independent of all the variables we investigated. Stopping the trial early may have widened the difference between the treatment groups.

Selective IgG2 subclass deficiency--a marker for the syndrome of pre/postnatal growth retardation, developmental delay, hypotrophy of distal extremities, dental anomalies and eczema.

We report a third family with members displaying pre- and postnatal growth retardation, hypotonia, psychomotor retardation, small puffy hands and feet, dental anomalies and eczematous skin. The four affected members are all females born to unrelated parents consistent with the previously proposed autosomal recessive mode of inheritance. We report a further clinical feature of selective immunoglobulin IgG2 subclass deficiency which would explain some of the clinical findings and might provide an immunological marker for diagnostic confirmation of the syndrome.