Prospective observational study of early respiratory management in preterm neonates less than 35 weeks of gestation.

BACKGROUND: Current guidelines for management of respiratory distress syndrome (RDS) recommend continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) as the primary mode of respiratory support even in the most premature neonates, reserving endotracheal intubation (ETI) for rescue surfactant or respiratory failure. The incidence and timing of ETI in practice is poorly documented. METHODS: In 27 Level III NICUs in the US (n = 19), Canada (n = 3) and Poland (n = 5), demographics and baseline characteristics, respiratory support modalities including timing of ETI, administration of surfactant and caffeine/other methylxanthines, and neonatal morbidities were prospectively recorded in consecutive preterm neonates following written parental consent. Infants were divided into three groups according to gestational age (GA) at birth, namely 26-28, 29-32 and 33-34 weeks. Statistical comparisons between groups were done using Chi-Square tests. RESULTS: Of 2093 neonates (US = 1507, 254 Canada, 332 Poland), 378 (18%) were 26-28 weeks gestational age (GA), 835 (40%) were 29-32 weeks, and 880 (42%) were 33-34 weeks. Antenatal steroid use was 81% overall, and approximately 89% in neonates ≤32 weeks. RDS incidence and use of ventilatory or supplemental oxygen support were similar across all sites. CPAP was initiated in 43% of all infants, being highest in the 29-32-week group, with a lower proportion in other GA categories (p < 0.001). The overall rate of ETI was 74% for neonates 26-28 weeks (42% within 15 min of birth, 49% within 60 min, and 57% within 3 h), 33% for 29-32 weeks (13 16 and 21%, respectively), and 16% for 33-34 weeks (5, 6 and 8%, respectively). Overall intubation rates and timing were similar between countries in all GAs. Rates within each country varied widely, however. Across US sites, overall ETI rates in 26-28-week neonates were 30-60%, and ETI within 15 min varied from 0 to 83%. Similar within 15-min variability was seen at Polish sites (22-67%) in this GA, and within all countries for 29-32 and 33-34-week neonates. CONCLUSION: Despite published guidelines for management of RDS, rate and timing of ETI varies widely, apparently unrelated to severity of illness. The impact of this variability on outcome is unknown but provides opportunities for further approaches which can avoid the need for ETI.

A pharmacoeconomic analysis of in-hospital costs resulting from reintubation in preterm infants treated with lucinactant, beractant, or poractant alfa.

OBJECTIVES: Reintubation and subsequent mechanical ventilation (MV) in preterm infants after surfactant replacement therapy are associated with excess morbidity and mortality and likely increase in-hospital costs. Specific surfactant therapy selection for prevention of respiratory distress syndrome (RDS) in preterm infants receiving conventional MV may impact not only clinical outcomes but also pharmacoeconomic outcomes. METHODS: We conducted a pharmacoeconomic analysis of the impact of surfactant selection and reintubation and subsequent MV of preterm infants on health care resource utilization. Rates of reintubation and duration of MV after reintubation were determined from 1546 preterm infants enrolled in two surfactant trials comparing lucinactant to beractant and poractant alfa. Hospital costs were obtained from a 2010 US database from 1564 preterm infants with RDS, with a direct cost of $2637 per day for MV in the neonatal intensive care unit. Cost of reintubation by study and treatment was estimated as the incidence of reintubation multiplied by days on MV therapy after reintubation multiplied by cost per day for direct MV costs, standardized per 100 surfactant-treated infants. RESULTS: There were no differences between studies or treatment groups in the overall extubation rate. Average MV duration following reintubation was similar between groups in both trials; however, reintubation rates were significantly lower (p<0 05) for infants treated with lucinactant than for those receiving beractant or poractant alfa. The observed differences in reintubation rates resulted in a projected cost saving of $160,013 to $252,203 per 100 infants treated with lucinactant versus animal-derived surfactants. CONCLUSIONS: In this analysis, higher reintubation rates following successful extubation in preterm infants receiving animal-derived surfactant preparations significantly increased estimated in-hospital costs, primarily due to excess costs associated with MV. This analysis suggests that surfactant selection may have a significant pharmacoeconomic impact on cost of patient care. Additional cost assessment of potential reduction in reintubation-associated morbidity is warranted.

A pilot, randomized, controlled clinical trial of lucinactant, a peptide-containing synthetic surfactant, in infants with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure.

OBJECTIVE: Inhibition of surfactant function and abnormal surfactant synthesis lead to surfactant dysfunction in children with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure. We evaluated whether intratracheal lucinactant, a synthetic, peptide-containing surfactant, was safe and well-tolerated in infants with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure, and assessed its effects on clinical outcomes. METHODS AND MAIN RESULTS: Infants ≤ 2 yrs of age with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure were enrolled in a phase II, double-blind, multinational, placebo-controlled randomized trial across 36 pediatric intensive care units. Infants requiring mechanical ventilation with persistent hypoxemia meeting acute lung injury criteria were randomized to receive intratracheal lucinactant (175 mg/kg) or air placebo. One retreatment was allowed 12-24 hrs after initial dosing if hypoxemia persisted. Peri-dosing tolerability of intratracheal lucinactant and adverse experiences were assessed. Mechanical ventilation duration was analyzed using analysis of variance. The Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test was used for categorical variables.We enrolled 165 infants (84 lucinactant; 81 placebo) with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure. There were no significant differences in baseline subject characteristics, with the exception of a lower positive end-expiratory pressure and higher tidal volume in placebo subjects. The incidence of transient peri-dosing bradycardia and desaturation was significantly higher in the lucinactant treatment group. There were no statistical differences between groups for other adverse events or mortality. Oxygenation improved in infants randomized to receive lucinactant as indicated by fewer second treatments (67% lucinactant vs. 81% placebo, p = .02) and a trend in improvement in partial pressure of oxygen in arterial blood to fraction of inspired oxygen from eligibility to 48 hrs after dose (p = .06). There was no significant reduction in duration of mechanical ventilation with lucinactant (geometric least square means: 4.0 days lucinactant vs. 4.5 days placebo; p = .254). In a subset of infants (n = 22), the duration of mechanical ventilation in children with acute lung injury (partial pressure of oxygen in arterial blood to fraction of inspired oxygen >200) was significantly shorter with lucinactant (least square means: 2.4 days lucinactant vs. 4.3 days placebo; p = .006). CONCLUSIONS: In mechanically ventilated infants with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure, treatment with intratracheal lucinactant appeared to be generally safe. An improvement in oxygenation and a significantly reduced requirement for retreatment suggests that lucinactant might improve lung function in infants with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure.