Comparison of clinical outcomes between active and permissive blood pressure management in extremely preterm infants

Author:

Aladangady NarendraORCID,Sinha AjayORCID,Banerjee JayantaORCID,Asamoah Felix,Mathew Asha,Chisholm PhillippaORCID,Kempley StevenORCID,Morris JoanORCID

Abstract

Background There remains uncertainty about the definition of normal blood pressure (BP), and when to initiate treatment for hypotension for extremely preterm infants. To determine the short-term outcomes of extremely preterm infants managed by active compared with permissive BP support regimens during the first 72 hours of life. Method This is a retrospective medical records review of 23+0–28+6 weeks’ gestational age (GA) infants admitted to neonatal units (NNU) with active BP support (aimed to maintain mean arterial BP (MABP) >30 mmHg irrespective of the GA) and permissive BP support (used medication only when babies developed signs of hypotension) regimens. Babies admitted after 12 hours of age, or whose BP data were not available were excluded. Results There were 764 infants admitted to the participating hospitals; 671 (88%) were included in the analysis (263 active BP support and 408 permissive BP support). The mean gestational age, birth weight, admission temperature, clinical risk index for babies (CRIB) score and first haemoglobin of infants were comparable between the groups. Active BP support group infants had consistently higher MABP and systolic BP throughout the first 72 hours of life (p<0.01). In the active group compared to the permissive group 56 (21.3%) vs 104 (25.5%) babies died, and 21 (8%) vs 51 (12.5%) developed >grade 2 intra ventricular haemorrhage (IVH). Death before discharge (adjusted OR 1.38 (0.88 – 2.16)) or IVH (1.38 (0.96 – 1.98)) was similar between the two groups. Necrotising enterocolitis (NEC) ≥stage 2 was significantly higher in permissive BP support group infants (1.65 (1.07 – 2.50)). Conclusions There was no difference in mortality or IVH between the two BP management approaches. Active BP support may reduce NEC. This should be investigated prospectively in large multicentre randomised studies.

Funder

Research for Patient Benefit Programme

Publisher

National Institute for Health and Care Research

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3