Techniques to increase lumbar puncture success in newborn babies: the NeoCLEAR RCT.

Background: Lumbar puncture is an essential tool for diagnosing meningitis. Neonatal lumbar puncture, although frequently performed, has low success rates (50-60%). Standard technique includes lying infants on their side and removing the stylet 'late', that is, after the needle is thought to have entered the cerebrospinal fluid. Modifications to this technique include holding infants in the sitting position and removing the stylet 'early', that is, following transection of the skin. To the best of our knowledge, modified techniques have not previously been tested in adequately powered trials. Objectives: The aim of the Neonatal Champagne Lumbar punctures Every time - An RCT (NeoCLEAR) trial was to compare two modifications to standard lumbar puncture technique, that is, use of the lying position rather than the sitting position and of 'early' rather than 'late' stylet removal, in terms of success rates and short-term clinical, resource and safety outcomes. Methods: This was a multicentre 2 × 2 factorial pragmatic non-blinded randomised controlled trial. Infants requiring lumbar puncture (with a working weight ≥ 1000 g and corrected gestational age from 27+0 to 44+0 weeks), and whose parents provided written consent, were randomised by web-based allocation to lumbar puncture (1) in the sitting or lying position and (2) with early or late stylet removal. The trial was powered to detect a 10% absolute risk difference in the primary outcome, that is, the percentage of infants with a successful lumbar puncture (cerebrospinal fluid containing < 10,000 red cells/mm3). The primary outcome was analysed by modified intention to treat. Results: Of 1082 infants randomised (sitting with early stylet removal, n = 275; sitting with late stylet removal, n = 271; lying with early stylet removal, n = 274; lying with late stylet removal, n = 262), 1076 were followed up until discharge. Most infants were term born (950/1076, 88.3%) and were aged < 3 days (936/1076, 87.0%) with a working weight > 2.5 kg (971/1076, 90.2%). Baseline characteristics were balanced across groups. In terms of the primary outcome, the sitting position was significantly more successful than lying [346/543 (63.7%) vs. 307/533 (57.6%), adjusted risk ratio 1.10 (95% confidence interval 1.01 to 1.21); p = 0.029; number needed to treat = 16 (95% confidence interval 9 to 134)]. There was no significant difference in the primary outcome between early stylet removal and late stylet removal [338/545 (62.0%) vs. 315/531 (59.3%), adjusted risk ratio 1.04 (95% confidence interval 0.94 to 1.15); p = 0.447]. Resource consumption was similar in all groups, and all techniques were well tolerated and safe. Limitations: This trial predominantly recruited term-born infants who were < 3 days old, with working weights > 2.5 kg. The impact of practitioners' seniority and previous experience of different lumbar puncture techniques was not investigated. Limited data on resource use were captured, and parent/practitioner preferences were not assessed. Conclusion: Lumbar puncture success rate was higher with infants in the sitting position but was not affected by timing of stylet removal. Lumbar puncture is a safe, well-tolerated and simple technique without additional cost, and is easily learned and applied. The results support a paradigm shift towards sitting technique as the standard position for neonatal lumbar puncture, especially for term-born infants during the first 3 days of life. Future work: The superiority of the sitting lumbar puncture technique should be tested in larger populations of premature infants, in those aged > 3 days and outside neonatal care settings. The effect of operators' previous practice and the impact on family experience also require further investigation, alongside in-depth analyses of healthcare resource utilisation. Future studies should also investigate other factors affecting lumbar puncture success, including further modifications to standard technique. Trial registration: This trial is registered as ISRCTN14040914 and as Integrated Research Application System registration 223737. Funding: This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: 15/188/106) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 27, No. 33. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

Newborn babies are more susceptible to getting meningitis, and this can be fatal or have lifelong complications. A lumbar puncture is an essential test for diagnosing meningitis. Lumbar puncture involves taking a small amount of spinal fluid from the lower back using a needle. Analysing the fluid confirms or excludes meningitis, allowing the right treatment to be given. Lumbar punctures are commonly performed in newborns, but are technically difficult. In 50­60% of lumbar punctures in newborns, either no fluid is obtained or the sample is mixed with blood, making analysis less reliable. No-one knows which is the best technique, and so practice varies. The baby can be held lying on their side or sat up, and the 'stylet', which is a thin piece of metal that sits inside (and aids insertion of) the needle, can be removed either soon after passing through the skin (i.e. 'early stylet removal') or once the tip is thought to have reached the spinal fluid (i.e. 'late stylet removal'). We wanted to find the best technique for lumbar puncture in newborns. Therefore, we compared sitting with lying position, and 'early' with 'late' stylet removal. We carried out a large trial in newborn care and maternity wards in 21 UK hospitals. With parental consent, we recruited 1082 full-term and premature babies who needed a lumbar puncture. Our results demonstrated that the sitting position was more successful than lying position, but the timing of stylet removal did not affect success. In summary, the sitting position is an inexpensive, safe, well-tolerated and easily learned way to improve lumbar puncture success rates in newborns. Our results strongly support using this technique in newborn babies worldwide.

Pressure and tidal volume delivery in extremely preterm infants at birth using different t-piece resuscitation devices.

Infants <28 weeks' gestation in need of inflations at birth were recorded with Respiratory Function Monitor. Two devices were used for resuscitation. Peak Inspiratory Pressure spikes were visible in all inflations with GE Panda and in none with Neo-Puff. There was no significant difference in mean Vte/kg between GE Panda and Neo-Puff.

Survey of transfusion practices in preterm infants in Europe.

BACKGROUND: Preterm infants commonly receive red blood cell (RBC), platelet and fresh frozen plasma (FFP) transfusions. The aim of this Neonatal Transfusion Network survey was to describe current transfusion practices in Europe and to compare our findings to three recent randomised controlled trials to understand how clinical practice relates to the trial data. METHODS: From October to December 2020, we performed an online survey among 597 neonatal intensive care units (NICUs) caring for infants with a gestational age (GA) of <32 weeks in 18 European countries. RESULTS: Responses from 343 NICUs (response rate: 57%) are presented and showed substantial variation in clinical practice. For RBC transfusions, 70% of NICUs transfused at thresholds above the restrictive thresholds tested in the recent trials and 22% below the restrictive thresholds. For platelet transfusions, 57% of NICUs transfused at platelet count thresholds above 25×109/L in non-bleeding infants of GA of <28 weeks, while the 25×109/L threshold was associated with a lower risk of harm in a recent trial. FFP transfusions were administered for coagulopathy without active bleeding in 39% and for hypotension in 25% of NICUs. Transfusion volume, duration and rate varied by factors up to several folds between NICUs. CONCLUSIONS: Transfusion thresholds and aspects of administration vary widely across European NICUs. In general, transfusion thresholds used tend to be more liberal compared with data from recent trials supporting the use of more restrictive thresholds. Further research is needed to identify the barriers and enablers to incorporation of recent trial findings into neonatal transfusion practice.

Assessment of infant position and timing of stylet removal to improve lumbar puncture success in neonates (NeoCLEAR): an open-label, 2 × 2 factorial, randomised, controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Newborn infants are the highest-risk age group for bacterial meningitis. Lumbar punctures are therefore frequently performed in neonates, but success rates are low (50-60%). In Neonatal Champagne Lumbar punctures Every time-A Randomised Controlled Trial (NeoCLEAR), we sought to optimise infant lumbar puncture by evaluating two modifications to traditional technique: sitting position versus lying down and early stylet removal (stylet removal after transecting the subcutaneous tissue) versus late stylet removal. METHODS: NeoCLEAR was an open-label, 2 × 2 factorial, randomised, controlled trial, conducted in 21 UK neonatal and maternity units. Infants requiring lumbar puncture at 27+0 to 44+0 weeks corrected gestational age and weighing 1000 g or more were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1) to sitting position and early stylet removal, sitting position and late stylet removal, lying position and early stylet removal, or lying position and late stylet removal using a 24/7, web-based, secure, central randomisation system. Block randomisation was stratified within site by corrected gestational age (27+0 to 31+6 weeks, 32+0 to 36+6 weeks, 37+0 to 40+6 weeks, or 41+0 to 44+0 weeks), using variable block sizes of four and eight with equal frequency. Laboratory staff were masked to allocation. The primary outcome was successful first lumbar puncture, defined as obtaining a cerebrospinal fluid sample with a red blood cell count of less than 10 000 cells per µL. The primary and secondary (including safety) outcomes were analysed by the groups to which infants were assigned regardless of deviation from the protocol or allocation received, but with exclusion of infants who were withdrawn before data collection or who did not undergo lumbar puncture (modified intention-to-treat analysis). This study is registered with ISRCTN, ISRCTN14040914. FINDINGS: Between Aug 3, 2018, and Aug 31, 2020, 1082 infants were randomly assigned to sitting (n=546) or lying (n=536), and early (n=549) or late (n=533) stylet removal. 1076 infants were followed-up until discharge and included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis. 961 (89%) infants were term, and 936 (87%) were younger than 3 days. Successful first lumbar puncture was more frequently observed in sitting than in lying position (346 [63·7%] of 543 vs 307 [57·6%] of 533; adjusted risk ratio 1·10 [95% CI 1·01 to 1·21], p=0·029; number needed to treat=16). Timing of stylet removal had no discernible effect on the primary outcome (338 [62·0%] of 545 infants in the early stylet removal group and 315 [59·3%] of 531 in the late stylet removal group had a successful first lumbar puncture; adjusted risk ratio 1·04 [95% CI 0·94-1·15], p=0·45). Sitting was associated with fewer desaturations than was lying (median lowest oxygen saturations during first lumbar puncture 93% [IQR 89-96] vs 90% [85-94]; median difference 3·0% [2·1-3·9], p<0·0001). One infant from the sitting plus late stylet removal group developed a scrotal haematoma 2 days after lumbar puncture, which was deemed to be possibly related to lumbar puncture. INTERPRETATION: NeoCLEAR is the largest trial investigating paediatric lumbar puncture so far. Success rates were improved when sitting rather than lying. Sitting lumbar puncture is safe, cost neutral, and well tolerated. We predominantly recruited term neonates younger than 3 days; other populations warrant further study. Neonatal lumbar puncture is commonly performed worldwide; these results therefore strongly support the widespread adoption of sitting technique for neonatal lumbar puncture. FUNDING: UK National Institute for Health and Care Research.

Safe emergency neonatal airway management: current challenges and potential approaches.

This review examines the airway adjuncts currently used to acutely manage the neonatal airway. It describes the challenges encountered with facemask ventilation and intubation. Evidence is presented on how to optimise intubation safety and success rates with the use of videolaryngoscopy and attention to the intubation environment. The supraglottic airway (laryngeal mask airway) is emerging as a promising neonatal airway adjunct. It can be used effectively with little training to provide a viable alternative to facemask ventilation and intubation in neonatal resuscitation and be used as an alternative conduit for the administration of surfactant.

Building a community of practice through social media using the hashtag #neoEBM.

OBJECTIVES: Social media use is associated with developing communities of practice that promote the rapid exchange of information across traditional institutional and geographical boundaries faster than previously possible. We aimed to describe and share our experience using #neoEBM (Neonatal Evidence Based Medicine) hashtag to organise and build a digital community of neonatal care practice. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Analysis of #neoEBM Twitter data in the Symplur Signals database between 1 May 2018 to 9 January 2021. Data on tweets containing the #neoEBM hashtag were analysed using online analytical tools, including the total number of tweets and user engagement. RESULTS: Since its registration, a total of 3 228 distinct individual Twitter users used the hashtag with 23 939 tweets and 37 259 710 impressions generated. The two days with the greatest number of tweets containing #neoEBM were 8 May 2018 (n = 218) and 28 April 2019 (n = 340), coinciding with the annual Pediatric Academic Societies meeting. The majority of Twitter users made one tweet using #neoEBM (n = 1078), followed by two tweets (n = 411) and more than 10 tweets (n = 347). The number of individual impressions (views) of tweets containing #neoEBM was 37 259 710. Of the 23 939 tweets using #neoEBM, 17 817 (74%) were retweeted (shared), 15 643 (65%) included at least one link and 1 196 (5%) had at least one reply. As #neoEBM users increased over time, so did tweets containing #neoEBM, with each additional user of the hashtag associated with a mean increase in 7.8 (95% CI 7.7-8.0) tweets containing #neoEBM. CONCLUSION: Our findings support the observation that the #neoEBM community possesses many of the characteristics of a community of practice, and it may be an effective tool to disseminate research findings. By sharing our experiences, we hope to encourage others to engage with or build online digital communities of practice to share knowledge and build collaborative networks across disciplines, institutions and countries.

Early treatment versus expectant management of hemodynamically significant patent ductus arteriosus for preterm infants.

BACKGROUND: Patent ductus arteriosus (PDA) is associated with significant morbidity and mortality in preterm infants. Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are used to prevent or treat a PDA. There are concerns regarding adverse effects of NSAIDs in preterm infants. Controversy exists on whether early targeted treatment of a hemodynamically significant (hs) PDA improves clinical outcomes. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness and safety of early treatment strategies versus expectant management for an hs-PDA in reducing mortality and morbidity in preterm infants. SEARCH METHODS: We used the standard search strategy of Cochrane Neonatal to search the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2019, Issue 6) in the Cochrane Library; MEDLINE via PubMed (1966 to 31 May 2019), Embase (1980 to 31 May 2019), and CINAHL (1982 to 31 May 2019). An updated search was run on 2 October 2020 in the following databases: CENTRAL via CRS Web and MEDLINE via Ovid. We searched clinical trial databases, conference proceedings, and the reference lists of retrieved articles for randomized controlled trials (RCT) and quasi-randomized trials. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included RCTs in which early pharmacological treatment, defined as treatment initiated within the first seven days after birth, was compared to no intervention, placebo or other non-pharmacological expectant management strategies for treatment of an hs-PDA in preterm (< 37 weeks' postmenstrual age) or low birth weight (< 2500 grams) infants. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We performed data collection and analyses in accordance with the methods of Cochrane Neonatal. Our primary outcome was all-cause mortality during hospital stay. We used the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of evidence for selected clinical outcomes. MAIN RESULTS: We included 14 RCTs that enrolled 910 infants. Seven RCTs compared early treatment (defined as treatment initiated by seven days of age) versus expectant management and seven RCTs compared very early treatment (defined as treatment initiated by 72 hours of age) versus expectant management. No difference was demonstrated between early treatment versus expectant management (no treatment initiated within the first seven days after birth) for an hs-PDA for the primary outcome of 'all-cause mortality' (6 studies; 500 infants; typical RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.46 to 1.39; typical RD -0.02; 95% CI -0.07 to 0.03; moderate-certainty evidence), or other important outcomes such as surgical PDA ligation (4 studies; 432 infants; typical RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.80; typical RD -0.03; 95% CI -0.09 to 0.03; very low-certainty evidence), chronic lung disease (CLD) (4 studies; 339 infants; typical RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.29; typical RD -0.03; 95% CI -0.10 to 0.03; moderate-certainty evidence), severe intraventricular hemorrhage (IVH) (2 studies; 171 infants; typical RR 0.83,95% CI 0.32 to 2.16; typical RD -0.01; 95% CI -0.08 to 0.06; low-certainty evidence), and necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC) (5 studies; 473 infants; typical RR 2.34,95% CI 0.86 to 6.41; typical RD 0.04; 95% CI 0.01 to 0.08; low-certainty evidence). Infants receiving early treatment in the first seven days after birth were more likely to receive any PDA pharmacotherapy compared to expectant management (2 studies; 232 infants; typical RR 2.30, 95% CI 1.86 to 2.83; typical RD 0.57; 95% CI 0.48 to 0.66; low-certainty evidence). No difference was demonstrated between very early treatment versus expectant management (no treatment initiated within the first 72 hours after birth) for an hs-PDA for the primary outcome of 'all-cause mortality' (7 studies; 384 infants; typical RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.53; typical RD -0.03; 95% CI -0.09 to 0.04; moderate-certainty evidence) or other important outcomes such as surgical PDA ligation (5 studies; 293 infants; typical RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.36 to 2.17; typical RD -0.01; 95% CI -0.05 to 0.02; moderate-certainty evidence), CLD (7 studies; 384 infants; typical RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.08; typical RD -0.05; 95% CI -0.13 to 0.04; low-certainty evidence), severe IVH (4 studies, 240 infants; typical RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.21 to 1.93; typical RD -0.02; 95% CI -0.07 to 0.04; moderate-certainty evidence), NEC (5 studies; 332 infants; typical RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.53 to 2.21; typical RD 0.01; 95% CI -0.04 to 0.06; moderate-certainty evidence) and neurodevelopmental impairment (1 study; 79 infants; RR 0.27, 95% CI 0.03 to 2.31 for moderate/severe cognitive delay at 18 to 24 months; RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.05 to 5.71 for moderate/severe motor delay at 18 to 24 months; RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.10 to 2.78 for moderate/severe language delay at 18 to 24 months; low-certainty evidence). Infants receiving very early treatment in the first 72 hours after birth were more likely to receive any PDA pharmacotherapy compared to expectant management (4 studies; 156 infants; typical RR 1.64, 95% CI 1.31 to 2.05; typical RD 0.69; 95% CI 0.60 to 0.79; very low-certainty evidence). Very early treatment, however, shortened the duration of hospitalization compared to expectant management (4 studies; 260 infants; MD -5.35 days; 95% CI -9.23 to -1.47; low-certainty evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Early or very early pharmacotherapeutic treatment of an hs-PDA probably does not reduce mortality in preterm infants (moderate-certainty evidence). Early pharmacotherapeutic treatment of hs-PDA may increase NSAID exposure (low-certainty evidence) without likely reducing CLD (moderate-certainty evidence), severe IVH or NEC (low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain whether very early pharmacotherapeutic treatment of hs-PDA also increases NSAID exposure (very low-certainty evidence). Very early treatment probably does not reduce surgical PDA ligation, severe IVH or NEC (moderate-certainty evidence), and may not reduce CLD or neurodevelopmental impairment (low-certainty evidence). Additional large trials that specifically include preterm infants at the highest risk of PDA-attributable morbidity, are adequately powered for patient-important outcomes and are minimally contaminated by open-label treatment are required to explore if early targeted treatment of hs-PDA improves clinical outcomes. There are currently two trials awaiting classification and two ongoing trials exploring this question.

Study protocol: NeoCLEAR: Neonatal Champagne Lumbar punctures Every time - An RCT: a multicentre, randomised controlled 2 × 2 factorial trial to investigate techniques to increase lumbar puncture success.

BACKGROUND: The neonatal period carries the highest risk of bacterial meningitis (~ 1 in 5000 births), bearing high mortality (~ 10%) and morbidity (20-50%) rates. Lumbar puncture (LP) remains essential to the diagnosis of meningitis. Though LP is a common procedure in neonates, success rates are lower (50-60%) than in other patient populations. None of the currently-practised neonatal LP techniques are supported by evidence from adequately-powered, randomised controlled trials (RCTs). NeoCLEAR aims to compare two modifications to the traditional technique which are free, accessible, and commonly practised: sitting (as opposed to lying) position, and 'early' (as opposed to 'late') stylet removal. METHODS/DESIGN: Written parental informed consent permitting, infants in neonatal/maternity wards, of 27+ 0 to 44+ 0 weeks corrected gestational age and weighing ≥1000 g, who require an LP, will be randomly allocated to sitting or lying position, and to early or late stylet removal. The co-primary objectives are to compare success rates (the proportion of infants with cerebrospinal fluid red cell count < 10,000/mm3 on first LP procedure) in 1020 infants between the two positions, and between the two methods of stylet removal. Secondary outcomes relate to LP procedures, complications, diagnoses of meningitis, duration of antibiotics and hospital stay. A modified intention-to-treat analysis will be conducted. DISCUSSION: Two modifications to the traditional LP technique (sitting vs lying position; and early vs late stylet removal) will be simultaneously investigated in an efficient and appropriately-powered 2 × 2 factorial RCT design. Analysis will identify the optimal techniques (in terms of obtaining easily-interpretable cerebrospinal fluid), as well as the impact on infants, parents and healthcare systems whilst providing robust safety data. Using a pragmatic RCT design, all practitioners will be trained in all LP techniques, but there will inevitably be variation between unit practice guidelines and other aspects of individual care. An improved LP technique would result in: • Fewer uninterpretable samples, repeated attempts and procedures • Reduced distress for infants and families • Decreased antibiotic use and risk of antibiotic resistance • Reduced healthcare costs due to fewer procedures, reduced length of stay, shorter antibiotic courses, and minimised antibiotic-associated complications TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN14040914. Date assigned: 26/06/2018.

Use of Intraosseous Needles in Neonates: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: The use of intraosseous (IO) access during resuscitation is widely accepted and promoted in paediatric medicine but features less prominently in neonatal training. Whilst umbilical venous catheterization (UVC) is a reliable method of delivering emergency drugs and fluids, it is not always achievable in a timely manner. IO access warrants exploration as an alternative. AIM: Conduct a systematic review of existing literature to examine the evidence for efficacy and safety of IO devices in neonatal patients, from birth to discharge. METHOD: A search of PubMed, Ovid, Medline, and Embase was carried out. Abstracts were screened for relevance to focus on neonatal-specific literature and studies which carried out separate analyses for neonates (infants <28 days of age or resident on a neonatal unit). RESULTS: One case series and 12 case reports describe IO device insertion into 41 neonates, delivering a variety of drugs, including adrenaline (epinephrine) and volume resuscitation. Complications range from none to severe. Cadaveric studies show that despite a small margin for error, IO devices can be correctly sited in neonates. Simulation studies suggest that IO devices may be faster and easier to site than UVC, even in experienced hands. CONCLUSION: IO access should be available on neonatal units and considered for early use in neonates where other access routes have failed. Appropriate training should be available to staff in addition to existing life support and UVC training. Further studies are required to assess the optimal device, position, and whether medication can be delivered IO as effectively as by UVC. If IO devices provide a faster method of delivering adrenaline effectively than UVC, this may lead to changes in neonatal resuscitation practice.

Nasal High-Flow Therapy as Primary Respiratory Support for Preterm Infants without the Need for Rescue with Nasal Continuous Positive Airway Pressure.

AIM: To evaluate the effectiveness of nasal high-flow therapy (nHFT) as primary respiratory support for preterm infants with respiratory distress syndrome (RDS) in two tertiary neonatal units. METHODS: A retrospective outcome analysis of initial respiratory support strategies was performed in two tertiary neonatal units in the UK: John Radcliffe Hospital (JRH), Oxford and St Peter's Hospital (SPH), Chertsey. Infants born between 28+0 and 36+6 weeks gestational age (GA) between May 2013 and June 2015 were included. RESULTS: A total of 381 infants, 191 from JRH and 190 from SPH, were analysed. Infants were stabilised in the delivery room using mask continuous positive airway pressure followed by nHFT. Endotracheal intubation was performed according to local protocols, depending on the severity of RDS. There were significant differences in initial intubation rates according to GA (26% JRH vs. 16.9% SPH, p < 0.001 for babies < 32 weeks GA, and 8.2% JRH vs. 6.5% SPH, p < 0.001 for babies > 32 weeks GA); however, most infants were successfully transitioned to nHFT. Intubation rates during the first 72 h were comparable between centres (14.7% JRH vs. 11.1% SPH, p = 0.29). There were no differences in neonatal morbidities, including air leak, duration of oxygen supplementation, bronchopulmonary dysplasia, sepsis, retinopathy of prematurity, intraventricular haemorrhage, necrotising enterocolitis, or median time to full-suck feeds. CONCLUSION: Use of nHFT for primary respiratory support, without use of nasal continuous positive airway pressure as "rescue" treatment, resulted in intubation rates lower or comparable to published data from randomised controlled trials.