Video versus Direct Laryngoscopy for Urgent Intubation of Newborn Infants.

BACKGROUND: Repeated attempts at endotracheal intubation are associated with increased adverse events in neonates. When clinicians view the airway directly with a laryngoscope, fewer than half of first attempts are successful. The use of a video laryngoscope, which has a camera at the tip of the blade that displays a view of the airway on a screen, has been associated with a greater percentage of successful intubations on the first attempt than the use of direct laryngoscopy in adults and children. The effect of video laryngoscopy among neonates is uncertain. METHODS: In this single-center trial, we randomly assigned neonates of any gestational age who were undergoing intubation in the delivery room or neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) to the video-laryngoscopy group or the direct-laryngoscopy group. Randomization was stratified according to gestational age (<32 weeks or ≥32 weeks). The primary outcome was successful intubation on the first attempt, as determined by exhaled carbon dioxide detection. RESULTS: Data were analyzed for 214 of the 226 neonates who were enrolled in the trial, 63 (29%) of whom were intubated in the delivery room and 151 (71%) in the NICU. Successful intubation on the first attempt occurred in 79 of the 107 patients (74%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 66 to 82) in the video-laryngoscopy group and in 48 of the 107 patients (45%; 95% CI, 35 to 54) in the direct-laryngoscopy group (P<0.001). The median number of attempts to achieve successful intubation was 1 (95% CI, 1 to 1) in the video-laryngoscopy group and 2 (95% CI, 1 to 2) in the direct-laryngoscopy group. The median lowest oxygen saturation during intubation was 74% (95% CI, 65 to 78) in the video-laryngoscopy group and 68% (95% CI, 62 to 74) in the direct-laryngoscopy group; the lowest heart rate was 153 beats per minute (95% CI, 148 to 158) and 148 (95% CI, 140 to 156), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Among neonates undergoing urgent endotracheal intubation, video laryngoscopy resulted in a greater number of successful intubations on the first attempt than direct laryngoscopy. (Funded by the National Maternity Hospital Foundation; VODE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04994652.).

Polyethylene bags before cord clamping in very preterm infants: a randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: Hypothermia on admission to the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) is associated with an increased risk of death in preterm infants. There are currently no evidence-based recommendations for thermal care before cord clamping (CC). We wished to determine whether placing very preterm infants in a polyethylene bag (PB) before CC, compared with after CC, results in more infants with a temperature in the normal range on NICU admission. DESIGN: Randomised controlled trial. SETTING: Tertiary maternity hospital. PATIENTS: Inborn infants<32 weeks' gestational age (GA). INTERVENTIONS: Infants were randomly assigned to have a PB placed before or after CC. MAIN OUTCOME: Rectal temperature within the normal range (36.5°C-37.5°C) on NICU admission. RESULTS: Between July 2020 and September 2022, 198/220 (90%) eligible infants were enrolled in this study; 99 (44 (44%) girls) were randomly assigned to BEFORE and 99 (53 (54%) girls) to AFTER. Median (IQR) GA 29 (27-31) vs 29 (27-31) weeks, mean (SD) birth weight 1206 (429) vs 1138 (419) g, respectively. The proportion of infants who had normal temperature on NICU admission did not differ between the groups (BEFORE 54/99 (55%) vs AFTER 55/98 (56%), p 0.824). The proportion of infants with a temperature outside of the normal range was similar between the groups; hypothermia (BEFORE 34/99 (34%) vs AFTER 33/98 (34%), hyperthermia (BEFORE 10/99 (10%) vs AFTER 10/98 (10%)). CONCLUSIONS: Placing a PB before CC did not increase the proportion of preterm infants with normal temperature on NICU admission. A large proportion of preterm infants had abnormal temperature. Further studies on thermoregulation before CC are needed. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04463511.

Thermoregulation for very preterm infants in the delivery room: a narrative review.

Abnormal temperature in preterm infants is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. Infants born prematurely are at risk of abnormal temperature immediately after birth in the delivery room (DR). The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends that the temperature of newly born infants is maintained between 36.5-37.5oC after birth. When caring for very preterm infants, the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation (ILCOR) recommends using a combination of interventions to prevent heat loss. While hypothermia remains prevalent, efforts to prevent it have increased the incidence of hyperthermia, which may also be harmful. Delayed cord clamping (DCC) for preterm infants has been recommended by ILCOR since 2015. Little is known about the effect of timing of DCC on temperature, nor have there been specific recommendations for thermal care before DCC. This review article focuses on the current evidence and recommendations for thermal care in the DR, and considers thermoregulation in the context of emerging interventions and future research directions. IMPACT: Abnormal temperature is common amongst very preterm infants after birth, and is an independent risk factor for mortality. The current guidelines recommend a combination of interventions to prevent heat loss after birth. Despite this, abnormal temperature is still a problem, across all climates and economies. New and emerging delivery room practice (i.e., delayed cord clamping, mobile resuscitation trolleys, early skin to skin care) may have an effect on infant temperature. This article reviews the current evidence and recommendations, and considers future research directions.

The history of neonatal intubation.

Interest in 'resurrecting' the lifeless by supporting breathing has been described since ancient times. For centuries, methods of resuscitating animals, then humans and specifically the 'lifeless' neonate were debated and discussed. Over time, with experimentation and worldwide collaboration, endotracheal tubes and laryngoscopes specific to the newborn were created and their use refined. This historical work has meant that today, the neonatal community focuses on refining the science and the art of intubation for the benefit of the newborn; who, where, when and how to intubate, with what devices and medications, bringing about significant change in the area of neonatal intubation. Recent work has focused on alternatives to neonatal intubation as the risks of endotracheal intubation and mechanical ventilation have become clearer. Appreciating the history of neonatal intubation and its (somewhat cyclical) changes over time can show us how far we've come and how far we can still go in the resuscitation and respiratory support of newborns.

Nasal interfaces for neonatal resuscitation.

BACKGROUND: The Neonatal Task Force of the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation (ILCOR) makes practice recommendations for the care of newborn infants in the delivery room (DR). ILCOR recommends that all infants who are gasping, apnoeic, or bradycardic (heart rate < 100 per minute) should be given positive pressure ventilation (PPV) with a manual ventilation device (T-piece, self-inflating bag, or flow-inflating bag) via an interface. The most commonly used interface is a face mask that encircles the infant's nose and mouth. However, gas leak and airway obstruction are common during face mask PPV. Nasal interfaces (single and binasal prongs (long or short), or nasal masks) and laryngeal mask airways (LMAs) may also be used to deliver PPV to newborns in the DR, and may be more effective than face masks. OBJECTIVES: To determine whether newborn infants receiving PPV in the delivery room with a nasal interface compared to a face mask, laryngeal mask airway (LMA), or another type of nasal interface have reduced mortality and morbidity. To assess whether safety and efficacy of the nasal interface differs according to gestational age or ventilation device. SEARCH METHODS: Searches were conducted in September 2022 in CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, Epistemonikos, and two trial registries. We searched conference abstracts and checked the reference lists of included trials and related systematic reviews identified through the search. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCT's that compared the use of nasal interfaces to other interfaces (face masks, LMAs, or one nasal interface to another) to deliver PPV to newborn infants in the DR. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Each review author independently evaluated the search results against the selection criteria, screened retrieved records, extracted data, and appraised the risk of bias. If they were study authors, they did not participate in the selection, risk of bias assessment, or data extraction related to the study. In such instances, the study was independently assessed by other review authors. We contacted trial investigators to obtain additional information. We completed data analysis according to the standards of Cochrane Neonatal, using risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence Intervals (CI) to measure the effect of the different interfaces. We used fixed-effect models and the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of the evidence. MAIN RESULTS: We included five trials, in which 1406 infants participated. They were conducted in 13 neonatal centres across Europe and Australia. Each of these trials compared a nasal interface to a face mask for the delivery of respiratory support to newborn infants in the DR. Potential sources of bias were a lack of blinding to treatment allocation of the caregivers and investigators in all trials. The evidence suggests that resuscitation with a nasal interface in the DR, compared with a face mask, may have little to no effect on reducing death before discharge (typical risk ratio (RR) 0.72, 95% CI 0.47 to 1.13; 3 studies, 1124 infants; low-certainty evidence). Resuscitation with a nasal interface may reduce the rate of intubation in the DR, but the evidence is very uncertain (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.85; 5 studies, 1406 infants; very low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain for the rate of intubation within 24 hours of birth (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.09; 3 studies, 749 infants; very low-certainty evidence), endotracheal intubation outside the DR during hospitalisation (RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.42; 1 study, 144 infants; very low-certainty evidence) and cranial ultrasound abnormalities (intraventricular haemorrhage (IVH) grade ≥ 3, or periventricular leukomalacia; RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.61; 3 studies, 749 infants; very low-certainty evidence). Resuscitation with a nasal interface in the DR, compared with a face mask, may have little to no effect on the incidence of air leaks (RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.09; 2 studies, 507 infants; low-certainty evidence), or the need for supplemental oxygen at 36 weeks' corrected gestational age (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.8 to 1.40; 2 studies, 507 infants; low-certainty evidence). We identified one ongoing study, which compares a nasal mask to a face mask to deliver PPV to infants in the DR. We did not identify any completed trials that compared nasal interfaces to LMAs or one nasal interface to another. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Nasal interfaces were found to offer comparable efficacy to face masks (low- to very low-certainty evidence), supporting resuscitation guidelines that state that nasal interfaces are a comparable alternative to face masks for providing respiratory support in the DR. Resuscitation with a nasal interface may reduce the rate of intubation in the DR when compared with a face mask. However, the evidence is very uncertain. This uncertainty is attributed to the use of a new ventilation system in the nasal interface group in two of the five trials. As such, it is not possible to differentiate separate, specific effects related to the ventilation device or to the interface in these studies.

Research in the Delivery Room: Can You Tell Me It's Evolution?

Many of the recommendations for newborn care in the delivery room (DR) are based on retrospective observational studies, preclinical studies of mannequins or animal models, and expert opinion. Conducting DR research is challenging. Many deliveries occur in fraught circumstances with little prior warning, making it difficult to get prospective consent from parents and buy-in from clinicians. Many DR interventions are difficult to mask for the purpose of a clinical trial and it is not easy to identify appropriate outcomes for studies that are sufficiently "short-term" that they are likely to be influenced by the intervention, yet sufficiently "long-term" to be considered clinically important. However, despite these challenges, much information has been accrued from clinical studies in recent years. In this article, we outline our experience of conducting clinical research in the DR. In our initial studies almost 20 years ago, we found wide variation in the equipment used both nationally and internationally, reflecting the paucity of evidence to support practice. This started a journey that has included many observational studies and randomized controlled trials that have attempted to refine how we care for newborn infants in the DR. Each has given further information and, inevitably, raised many more questions about the approach to caring for newborns in the DR.

Prospective comparison of thermometers used in very preterm infants.

We measured temperature on admission to the neonatal unit in a cohort of 54 very preterm infants. We measured rectal temperature with a digital thermometer (Microlife MT-1931) as the gold standard (MT-R). We also measured axillary temperature with the MT (MT-A), with the Welch Allyn SureTemp Plus 692 in 'continuous' (WAC) mode and in the default 'predictive' (WAP) mode. While MT-A and WAC frequently differed from MT-R by ≥0.3°C, they were both reasonably sensitive and specific for hypothermia (MT-R <36.5°C). WAP overestimated MT-R by ≥0.5°C on 37/53 (70%) occasions and had poor sensitivity for hypothermia, identifying only 2 of 29 infants with MT-R <36.5°C as hypothermic.

Comparison of rectal and axillary temperature measurements in preterm newborns.

OBJECTIVE: To compare rectal and axillary temperatures in preterm newborns on admission to the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU). DESIGN: Secondary analysis of data collected in a randomised controlled trial (RCT). SETTING: Maternity hospital, level 3 NICU. PATIENTS: Seventy-two newborns <31 weeks who were enrolled in the BAMBINO RCT (A randomised trial of exothermic mattresses to prevent heat loss in preterm infants at birth, ISRCTN31707342). INTERVENTIONS: Newborns were placed in polyethylene bags and were randomised to placement on exothermic mattresses, or not in the delivery room. All infants had rectal and axillary temperatures measured in immediate succession using a digital thermometer on NICU admission. OUTCOME MEASURES: Admission rectal and axillary temperatures. RESULTS: Mean (SD) gestational age was 28 (2) weeks and birth weight was 1138 (374) g. Mean rectal-axillary temperature difference was 0.1 (0.5°C) (range -1.4°C to +1.5°C). Rectal and axillary temperatures differed by ≥0.5°C in 18/72 (25%) infants; axillary temperature was higher than rectal in 6 (8%) and lower in 12 (17%). There was a positive linear relationship between rectal and axillary measurements (Pearson's correlation R=0.84). Applying the Bland-Altman technique, the width of 95% prediction interval was 1.8°C (-0.8°C to 1.0°C) implying that rectal and axillary measurements may vary by up to 1.0°C. Axillary temperature had a sensitivity of 65% when used to detect rectal hyperthermia and 100% sensitivity for hypothermia. CONCLUSION: Paired rectal and axillary temperature measurements in preterm newborns on NICU admission vary significantly. Axillary temperature was sensitive at detecting rectal hypothermia but not hyperthermia. Axillary temperature may not be an accurate proxy for rectal temperature measurement in all preterm newborns on NICU admission.

Randomised study of heart rate measurement in preterm newborns with ECG plus pulse oximetry versus oximetry alone.

AIM: To determine whether the IntelliVue monitor (ECG plus Masimo pulse oximeter (PO)) displays heart rate (HR) at birth more quickly than Nellcor PO (PO alone) among infants of 29-35 weeks' gestational age. METHODS: Unmasked parallel group randomised (1:1) study. RESULTS: We planned to enrol 100 infants; however, the study was terminated due to the COVID-19 pandemic when 39 infants had been enrolled (17 randomised to IntelliVue, 22 to Nellcor). We found no differences between the groups in the time to first HR display (median (IQR) IntelliVue ECG 49 (33, 71) vs Nellcor 47 (37, 86) s, p>0.999), in the proportion who had a face mask applied for breathing support, or in the time at which it was applied. Infants monitored with IntelliVue were handled more frequently and for longer. CONCLUSION: IntelliVue ECG did not display HR more quickly than Nellcor PO in preterm infants. We found no differences in the rate of or time to intervention between groups. Our study was terminated early so these findings should be interpreted with caution. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN16473881.

Initiation of respiratory support for extremely preterm infants at birth.

Neonatal resuscitation algorithms recommend assessing breathing and heart rate (HR) of newborns and giving respiratory support when one or both are unsatisfactory. Recommendations also state that preterm infants may be supported with continuous positive airway pressure rather than routinely intubated for positive pressure ventilation (PPV). We wished to describe the prevalence and time of initiation of respiratory support of extremely preterm and extremely low birthweight (ELBW) infants at our hospital. We reviewed videos of 55 infants. Although most were breathing, practically all newly born extremely preterm ELBW infants were given respiratory support soon after arrival to the resuscitation cot. For the majority, this was done without knowing the HR. The majority received PPV; again, this was often done without knowing the HR. A quarter of infants were managed without any PPV.

Bench-top comparison of thermometers used in newborn infants.

We wished to determine the accuracy of thermometers used to measure temperature in newborn infants. We measured the temperature of a water bath with three types of thermometer set at 0.5°C increments between 32.5°C and 38.5°C and compared the values to a control. We recorded the time to display steady-state temperature. The Microlife thermometer most closely approximated control temperature (mean difference <0.1°C (SD<0.1°C)) and displayed a reading in a mean time of 29 s (SD 2 s). Used in 'predictive' (default) mode, the Welch Allyn SureTemp Plus 692 thermometer differed from the control by a mean of 0.6°C (SD 0.3°C), displaying a temperature at 15 s (SD 3 s). This device consistently overestimated temperature. In 'continuous' mode, the mean difference was <0.1°C (SD<0.1°C) at 5 min. The Phillips probe differed from the control by a mean of 0.4°C (SD 0.2°C). Thermometers used to measure temperature in newborn infants may underestimate hypothermia. A prospective study in newborn infants is needed.

Crying and breathing by new-born preterm infants after early or delayed cord clamping.

Guidelines recommend delayed cord clamping (DCC) of at least 30 s for vigorous preterm infants who do not require resuscitation. It is not known whether DCC affects the rate of crying and breathing after birth. We reviewed videos of 80 preterm infants in the delivery room. Most infants cried and breathed after both immediate and delayed cord clamping before respiratory support was given. Infants arrived at the resuscitaire in similar physiological condition, regardless of the time after birth at which they arrived.

Randomised study comparing heart rate measurement in newly born infants using a monitor incorporating electrocardiogram and pulse oximeter versus pulse oximeter alone.

AIM: To determine whether IntelliVue (ECG plus Masimo pulse oximeter (PO)) measures heart rate (HR) in low-risk newborns more quickly than Nellcor PO (PO alone). METHODS: Unmasked parallel group randomised (1:1) study. RESULTS: We studied 100 infants, 47 randomised to IntelliVue, 53 to Nellcor. Time to first HR was shorter with IntelliVue ECG than Nellcor (median (IQR) 24 (19, 39) vs 48 (36, 69) s, p<0.001). There was no difference in time to display both HR and SpO2 (52 (47, 76) vs 48 (36, 69) s, p=0.507). IntelliVue PO displayed initial bradycardia more often than the Nellcor (55% vs 6%). Infants monitored with IntelliVue were handled more frequently and for longer. CONCLUSIONS: IntelliVue ECG displayed HR more quickly than Nellcor PO. IntelliVue PO often displayed initial bradycardia. Infants monitored with IntelliVue were handled more often. Study of ECG in high-risk infants is warranted.

Comparison of infant heart rate assessment by auscultation, ECG and oximetry in the delivery room.

Clinical assessment of an infant's heart rate (HR) in the delivery room (DR) has been reported to be inaccurate. We compared auscultation of the HR using a stethoscope with electrocardiography (ECG) and pulse oximetry (PO) for determining the HR in 92 low-risk newborn infants in the DR. Caregivers auscultated the HR while masked to the HR on the monitor. Auscultation underestimated ECG HR (mean difference (95% CI) by -9 (-15 to -2) beats per minute (bpm)) and PO HR (mean difference (95% CI) by -5 (-12 to 2) bpm). The median (IQR) time to HR by auscultation was 14 (10-18) s. As HR was determined quickly and with reasonable accuracy by auscultation in low-risk newborns, study in high-risk infants is warranted.