Less Invasive Surfactant Administration in Preterm Infants in Tertiary Neonatal Intensive Care Units in Germany: A Survey.

Neonatology Pub Date : 2024-07-17 DOI:10.1159/000539302
Christian A Maiwald, Axel R Franz, Christian F Poets, Laila Springer
{"title":"Less Invasive Surfactant Administration in Preterm Infants in Tertiary Neonatal Intensive Care Units in Germany: A Survey.","authors":"Christian A Maiwald, Axel R Franz, Christian F Poets, Laila Springer","doi":"10.1159/000539302","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The European guideline for treatment of respiratory distress syndrome recommends less invasive surfactant administration (LISA) as the preferred method of surfactant administration in spontaneously breathing preterm infants. However, there is limited evidence on practical aspects such as sedation and catheter types, leading to considerable variability between centers.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>An anonymous online survey (<ext-link ext-link-type=\"uri\" xlink:href=\"http://www.soscisurvey.de\" xmlns:xlink=\"http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink\">www.soscisurvey.de</ext-link>) was sent to 164 tertiary neonatal intensive care units (NICUs) in Germany including 43 questions on practical aspects of LISA.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 122 (74%) participating NICUs, 117 (96%) reported experience with LISA with 82% of those reporting LISA as their preferred method of surfactant administration. Indications for surfactant administration differed widely between NICUs. Most (89%) used FiO2-thresholds only or in combination with other criteria, such as Silverman score/signs of dyspnea (41%) or lung ultrasound findings (3%). Prophylactic surfactant was administered by 42%. Differences in use of LISA in extremely immature infants were reported (e.g., 36% did not perform LISA in infants below 24-26 weeks). Preferred drugs for sedation were (Es-)Ketamine, followed by Propofol and Midazolam. Minimum time interval between subsequent LISA procedures was 4 (2-6) h. Catheters specifically designed for LISA were used by most NICUs (69%).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This survey shows that LISA is common practice in German NICUs, but with considerable variability in practical aspects. These data may serve as a guidance for NICUs that have not yet implemented LISA and might be helpful design clinical trials with the aim to standardize and/or optimize LISA.</p>","PeriodicalId":94152,"journal":{"name":"Neonatology","volume":" ","pages":"1-10"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neonatology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000539302","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: The European guideline for treatment of respiratory distress syndrome recommends less invasive surfactant administration (LISA) as the preferred method of surfactant administration in spontaneously breathing preterm infants. However, there is limited evidence on practical aspects such as sedation and catheter types, leading to considerable variability between centers.

Methods: An anonymous online survey (www.soscisurvey.de) was sent to 164 tertiary neonatal intensive care units (NICUs) in Germany including 43 questions on practical aspects of LISA.

Results: Of 122 (74%) participating NICUs, 117 (96%) reported experience with LISA with 82% of those reporting LISA as their preferred method of surfactant administration. Indications for surfactant administration differed widely between NICUs. Most (89%) used FiO2-thresholds only or in combination with other criteria, such as Silverman score/signs of dyspnea (41%) or lung ultrasound findings (3%). Prophylactic surfactant was administered by 42%. Differences in use of LISA in extremely immature infants were reported (e.g., 36% did not perform LISA in infants below 24-26 weeks). Preferred drugs for sedation were (Es-)Ketamine, followed by Propofol and Midazolam. Minimum time interval between subsequent LISA procedures was 4 (2-6) h. Catheters specifically designed for LISA were used by most NICUs (69%).

Conclusion: This survey shows that LISA is common practice in German NICUs, but with considerable variability in practical aspects. These data may serve as a guidance for NICUs that have not yet implemented LISA and might be helpful design clinical trials with the aim to standardize and/or optimize LISA.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
德国三级新生儿重症监护病房早产儿的低侵入性表面活性物质管理:一项调查。
简介:欧洲呼吸窘迫综合征治疗指南建议将微创表面活性剂给药(LISA)作为早产儿自主呼吸时首选的表面活性剂给药方法。然而,有关镇静和导管类型等实际方面的证据有限,导致各中心之间存在很大差异:向德国 164 家三级新生儿重症监护病房(NICU)发送了匿名在线调查问卷(www.soscisurvey.de),其中包括 43 个有关 LISA 实际操作方面的问题:在 122 个(74%)参与调查的新生儿重症监护病房中,117 个(96%)报告了使用 LISA 的经验,其中 82% 的报告称 LISA 是他们首选的表面活性物质给药方法。各新生儿重症监护室使用表面活性物质的适应症差别很大。大多数(89%)仅使用 FiO2 阈值或结合其他标准使用,如 Silverman 评分/呼吸困难体征(41%)或肺部超声检查结果(3%)。42%的患者使用了预防性表面活性物质。有报告称,在对极未成熟婴儿使用 LISA 方面存在差异(例如,36% 的人未对 24-26 周以下的婴儿进行 LISA)。首选镇静药物为(Es-)氯胺酮,其次是丙泊酚和咪达唑仑。大多数新生儿重症监护室(69%)使用专为 LISA 设计的导管:这项调查显示,LISA 是德国新生儿重症监护室的常见做法,但在实际操作方面存在相当大的差异。这些数据可为尚未实施 LISA 的新生儿重症监护室提供指导,并有助于设计旨在标准化和/或优化 LISA 的临床试验。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The Care of Preterm and Term Newborns with Respiratory Conditions: A Systematic Synthesis of Evidence from Low- and Middle-Income Countries. Intravenous Dextrose for the Treatment of Neonatal Hypoglycaemia: A Systematic Review. Post-Asphyxial Aftercare and Management of Neonates in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Systematic Evidence Synthesis. Immediate Care for Common Conditions in Term and Preterm Neonates: The Evidence. Prevention and Treatment of Neonatal Infections in Facility and Community Settings of Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Descriptive Review.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1