Minimally invasive surfactant therapy for moderate to late premature neonates with respiratory distress syndrome born in a non-tertiary unit.

AIM: Minimally invasive surfactant therapy (MIST) is used to deliver exogenous surfactant to preterm neonates with respiratory distress syndrome. The objective of this study was to review the use of MIST in moderate to late preterm neonates born in a non-tertiary unit. METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted of neonates receiving MIST in a non-tertiary unit. MIST was considered in neonates requiring continuous positive airway pressure ≥ 6 cm H2 O and fraction of inspired oxygen ≥ 0.35. The Hobart method was used to deliver exogenous surfactant. The primary outcome was improvement in respiratory function. Secondary outcomes include intubation and transfer to a tertiary unit. RESULTS: Between 2016 and 2020, 23 infants were treated with MIST. The median gestational age was 33+5  ± 2.7 weeks and mean age of surfactant administration was 6.6 ± 3.6 h. Surfactant administration resulted in a reduction in median fraction of inspired oxygen from 0.3 to 0.21 at 4 h post MIST (P value: 0.001), and a reduction in median positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) from 7 to 6 cm H2 O at 24 h post MIST (P value: 0.003). Continuous positive airway pressure support was required for a median period of 3.5 days following MIST. There was respiratory improvement in 52 and 65% of neonates at 4 and 24 h, respectively, following MIST. The incidence of intubation was 13% and transfer to a tertiary unit was 44%. CONCLUSIONS: Use of MIST at this unit improved respiratory outcomes in moderate to late preterm neonates with respiratory distress syndrome. This procedure was well tolerated with few adverse events. Further research evaluating the efficacy of MIST in other non-tertiary units is warranted.

Language outcomes at 4 years of linguistically diverse children born very preterm: an Australian retrospective single-centre study.

BACKGROUND: Very preterm children are at increased risk of language delays. Concerns have been raised about the utility of standardised English language tools to diagnose language delay in linguistically diverse children. Our study investigated the incidence of language delay at 4 years in linguistically diverse very preterm children. METHODS: Very preterm children born in South Western Sydney, Australia, between 2012 and 2016, were assessed with the Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals Preschool-2 (CELF-P2) tool at 4 years of age. We sought to determine the incidence of language delay in this cohort using language scores from the CELF-P2 assessment tool, and explore potential predictors associated with language delay. RESULTS: One hundred and sixty very preterm children attended the 4-year assessment out of the included 270 long-term survivors. At 4 years, 76 (52%) very preterm children had language delay diagnosed using the CELF-P2 assessment tool. Children who preferred a language other than English had lower average core language scores on the CELF-P2 assessment tool (75.1±14.4) compared with children that preferred English (86.5±17.9); p=0.002. Very preterm children growing up in households that preferenced a language other than English and those who were born from multiple births had higher odds of language delay at 4 years (AOR 10.30 (95% CI 2.82 to 38.28); p<0.001 and AOR 2.93 (95% CI 1.20 to 7.14); p=0.018, respectively). Assessing these children using an English language tool may have affected language scores at 4 years. CONCLUSIONS: In this metropolitan setting, very preterm children from linguistically diverse backgrounds were found to be vulnerable to language delays at 4 years. Further large-scale studies evaluating the language outcomes of linguistically diverse preterm children with more culturally appropriate tools are warranted. We question the utility of standardised English language tools to assess language outcomes of linguistically diverse populations.