| Literature DB >> 24390060 |
Zbynek Stranak1, Jana Semberova, Keith Barrington, Colm O'Donnell, Neil Marlow, Gunnar Naulaers, Eugene Dempsey.
Abstract
UNLABELLED: Hypotension is a commonly diagnosed and treated complication of extremely low gestational age newborns (ELGAN), but enormous variation in diagnosis, management and clinical practice has been documented. We sought to evaluate practice regarding the management of hypotension in ELGANs and developed a web-based questionnaire addressing diagnosis, intervention thresholds and modes of treatment of hypotension in ELGANs. We received 216 completed questionnaires from respondents in 38 countries. Most responses (83 %) were from specialist units where, together, over 26,000 very low birth weight (VLBW) infants are cared for annually. The majority (73 %) defined hypotension as a mean blood pressure (BP) in mmHg less than the gestational age in weeks. Sixty percent assessed the circulation with additional methods; echocardiography was the most commonly used (74 %), with left ventricular output and fractional shortening the two most common measurements made. The majority (85 %) used volume administration as the initial intervention. Dopamine was the inotrope most commonly used initially (80 %). If the initial inotrope therapy failed, dobutamine was the most popular second-line treatment (28 %). Delayed cord clamping was used at 51 % of the centres.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2014 PMID: 24390060 PMCID: PMC4032643 DOI: 10.1007/s00431-013-2251-9
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Eur J Pediatr ISSN: 0340-6199 Impact factor: 3.183
Institution demographics of survey participants
| Characteristic (no. of responders) | Number (%) | |
|---|---|---|
| Level of care provided ( | Level I | 6 (3) |
| Level II | 31 (14) | |
| Level III | 178 (83) | |
| Number of beds in NICU ( | <10 | 61 (29) |
| 10–29 | 123 (58) | |
| 30–49 | 20 (9) | |
| >50 | 9 (4) | |
| Number of VLBW infants per year ( | ≤10 | 18 (9) |
| 11–50 | 42 (22) | |
| 51–100 | 54 (28) | |
| >101 | 81 (42) | |
| Type of hospital ( | University hospital | 87 (41) |
| Paediatric hospital | 29 (14) | |
| General hospital | 85 (40) | |
| Institutional diagnostic recommendation ( | Yes | 125 (61) |
| Institutional treatment recommendation ( | Yes | 132 (65) |
Fig. 1Proportion of clinical and laboratory methods used to evaluate perfusion
Ancillary investigations used to evaluate poor perfusion (180 respondents)
| Measurement | Number (%) | 95 % confidence interval | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lower bound | Upper bound | ||
| ECHO use | 134 (75) | 68 | 81 |
| Left cardiac output | 87 (65) | 57 | 73 |
| Right cardiac output | 45 (34) | 26 | 42 |
| Fractional shortening of left ventricle | 67 (50) | 41 | 59 |
| SVC flow | 51 (38) | 30 | 46 |
| Perfusion index | 31 (17) | 12 | 23 |
| Temperature measure | 85 (47) | 40 | 55 |
| CVP measure | 22 (12) | 7 | 17 |
| Mixed venous O2 | 18 (10) | 6 | 14 |
| EEG/aEEG | 6 (3) | 1 | 6 |
| NIRS measurement | 27 (15) | 10 | 20 |
ECHO echocardiography, SVC superior vena cava, CVP central venous pressure, EEG Electroencephalography, NIRS near infrared spectroscopy
Choice of inotrope intervention for hypotension (188 respondents)
| Number (%) | 95 % confidence interval | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Lower bound | Upper bound | ||
| First-line treatment | |||
| Dopamine | 116 (62) | 55 | 69 |
| Dobutamine | 34 (18) | 13 | 24 |
| Dopamine and dobutamine | 33 (18) | 12 | 23 |
| Epinephrine | 4 (2) | 0 | 4 |
| Norepinephrine | 1 (1) | 0 | 2 |
| Second-line treatment | |||
| Dopamine | 14 (7) | 4 | 11 |
| Dobutamine | 42 (22) | 16 | 28 |
| Dopamine and dobutamine | 52 (28) | 21 | 34 |
| Epinephrine | 32 (17) | 12 | 22 |
| Norepinephrine | 18 (10) | 5 | 14 |
| Steroids | 18 (10) | 5 | 14 |
| Milrinone | 2 (1) | 0 | 3 |
| Notropes and steroids | 11 (6) | 3 | 9 |
Practice variation in different region
TwoStep Cluster Analysis and Crosstabulation According Region. Variables from the survey questions addressing treatment regiment were subjected to the TwoStep Cluster analysis to identify responder groups who follow similar course of treatment. The algorithm identified four different clusters as demonstrated by coloured columns. Cluster distribution in different regions was compared using χ 2-test (asymptotic, exact and Monte Carlo, respectively). Significant differences among clusters are expressed as sign scheme. Level of significance 95 %, respectively 99,9 % is expressed as +(p < 0,05) and +++(p < 0,001), respectively
Eastern Europe: Czech Republic, Slovakia, Poland, Ukraine, Russia Northern Europe: United Kingdom, Ireland, Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Iceland, Latvia, Finland Southern Europe: Spain, Greece, Portugal, Italy, Turkey, Croatia, Slovenia Western Europe: Belgium, Germany, Netherlands, France, Switzerland and Others countries: United States, Saudi Arabia, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, Brazil, Egypt, Israel, Japan, Canada, Lebanon, Kuwait, United Arab Emirates