4.5 Article

Outcome of Very Premature Newborn Receiving an Early Second Dose of Surfactant for Persistent Respiratory Distress Syndrome

期刊

FRONTIERS IN PEDIATRICS
卷 9, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fped.2021.663697

关键词

premature; two doses surfactant; neonatal respiratory distress syndrome; outcome; mortality

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study revealed that premature infants receiving an early second dose of surfactant often had adverse antenatal characteristics and presented more severe RDS. While their survival rate was lower, surviving infants did not have significantly different morbidity compared to the control group.
Background: Infants presenting respiratory distress syndrome (RDS) not responding to surfactant often receive a second instillation. Few studies evaluated the consequences of this second administration. This study aimed at determining the outcome of infants presenting persistent RDS and receiving an early second dose of surfactant. Methods: Infants below 32 weeks' gestation who received a second dose of 100mg/kg of surfactant within the first 72 h of life, were retrospectively involved in this 42 months' study. They were matched to two controls receiving a single dose of 200mg/Kg based upon gender and gestational age. Results: 52/156 infants receiving two doses (Group 2-doses) were significantly more often SGA [22 (42%) vs. 21 (20%) p = 0.04] and outborn [29 (56%) vs. 13 (12%) p = 0.001]. They had received antenatal corticos teroid therapy less often [26 (50%) vs. 89 (86%) p = 0.001] and presented more severe RDS based upon FiO2 level, oxygenation index and radiography. Group 2-doses survival was lower (65.4% vs. 79.6 % p < 0.1) but surviving infants did not have different morbidity than controls. Discussion: Premature newborn receiving a second dose of surfactant had adverse antenatal characteristics, presented more severe RDS and only partially responded to the first dose. Outcomes of surviving infants who received 2 doses of surfactant were comparable to others.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据