EBNEO Commentary: Precision management of the patent ductus arteriosus in micropreemies
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Management of the PDA in preterm infants remains a contentious topic despite randomised controlled trial (RCT) evidence to date failing to demonstrate any clinically meaningful benefit with early pharmacotherapy.1, 2 Controversy exists on whether existing RCT evidence on PDA pharmacotherapy can be applied to micropreemies born at the limits of viability (22–24 weeks gestation) given the lack of representation of this population in contemporary RCTs. Giesinger et al, in their single-centre cohort study make a strong case for a more nuanced approach to hemodynamic management of these vulnerable preterm infants. Most existing RCTs of PDA therapy have defined a symptomatic PDA based on characteristic clinical signs, along with echocardiographic evidence of increased PDA shunt volume.2 Unfortunately, the most used echocardiographic criteria, the PDA size and the left atrium to aortic root ratio have poor inter-rater reliability.3, 4 In addition, existing trials have not attempted to differentiate between PDAs with moderate versus high shunt volume, based on any clinical or echocardiographic criteria. Post hoc analyses of recent RCTs have suggested that infants exposed to a moderate-large shunt beyond the first week are at higher risk of adverse clinical outcomes such as death or BPD.5-7 The quaternary NICU at the University of Iowa have addressed majority of the above-mentioned issues through an early targeted hemodynamic management approach with due emphasis on the dynamic nature of PDA shunt physiology in the first few days resulting in more targeted use of not only PDA pharmacotherapy but also pulmonary vasodilators and vasopressors, especially in the first week, that possibly translated to a large reduction in death/severe BPD, severe IVH and a substantial improvement in survival free of severe morbidity. Though there is sufficient biological plausibility to explain such findings, causality should be inferred with caution. First, despite attempts to control for natural improvement over time and other potential confounders, there exists a risk for unaccounted confounding inherent to cohort studies with historical controls, unless a cross-over study is conducted with re-introduction of hemodynamic management practices of the historical cohort for a period of time.8 Second, it is important to note that in the cohort of 22–24-week GA infants, primary acetaminophen therapy was effective in only 50% infants, and 53% of infants had a persistent hsPDA at 7 days. Their data aligns with recent trials demonstrating suboptimal PDA closure efficacy of intravenous acetaminophen in very preterm infants9; thereby lending credence to the suspicion that reduction in shunt exposure was unlikely to have solely contributed to a 23% absolute reduction in death/severe BPD. In conclusion, results of Giesinger study calls for a closer examination of the PDA physiology in this population of micropreemies with vastly different physiology compared with the ones mostly enrolled in RCTs; and despite growing calls for abandoning further clinical trials on PDA management, the current evidence underscores the need to clearly establish which PDA shunts, if any, are truly pathological and pursue further clinical trials that include micropreemies at the highest risk of PDA-attributable morbidities and explore highly effective and safe shunt elimination strategies. URL LINK: https://ebneo.org/ebneo-commentary-precision-management-of-the-patent-ductus-arteriosus-in-micropreemies/. This commentary is a tribute to the late Dr Regan Giesinger's unwavering devotion towards improving the outcomes of the smallest and sickest babies. In her relatively short career, she had advanced the field of neonatal hemodynamics in a manner that has not only touched the lives of hundreds of babies but has also opened several avenues for future hemodynamic research. She will be dearly missed by the neonatal community. None. The author has no conflicts of interest to disclose.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».