Early Use of Inhaled Nitric Oxide in Preterm Infants: Is there a Rationale for Selective Approach?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<b>Background</b> Inhaled nitric oxide (iNO) is being increasingly used in preterm infants < 34 weeks with hypoxemic respiratory failure (HRF) and/or pulmonary hypertension (PH). <b>Objective</b> To evaluate the risk factors, survival characteristics, and lung histopathology in preterm infants with PH/HRF. <b>Methods</b> Retrospective chart review was conducted to determine characteristics of 93 preterm infants treated with iNO in the first 28 days and compared with 930 matched controls. Factors associated with survival with preterm HRF and smooth muscle actin from nine autopsies were evaluated. <b>Results</b> Preterm neonates treated with iNO had a higher incidence of preterm prolonged rupture of membrane (pPROM ≥ 18 hours), oligohydramnios and delivered by C-section. In infants treated with iNO, antenatal steroids (odds ratio [OR],3.7; confidence interval [CI], 1.2–11.3; <i>p</i> = 0.02), pPROM (OR, 1.001; CI, 1.0–1.004; <i>p</i> = 0.3), and oxygenation response to iNO (OR, 3.7; CI, 1.08–13.1; <i>p</i> = 0.037) were associated with survival. Thirteen infants with all three characteristics had 100% (13/13) survival without severe intraventricular hemorrhage (IVH)/periventricular leukomalacia (PVL) compared with 48% survival (12/25, <i>p</i> = 0.004) and 16% severe IVH/PVL without any of these factors. Severity of HRF correlated with increased smooth muscle in pulmonary vasculature. <b>Conclusion</b> Preterm infants with HRF exposed to antenatal steroids and pPROM had improved oxygenation with iNO and survival without severe IVH/PVL. Precisely targeting this subset may be beneficial in future trials of iNO.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".