M Stavel1,2, J Wong3, Z Cieslak1, R Sherlock4, M Claveau5, P S Shah2,3. 1. Neonatal Intensive Care Unit, Royal Columbian Hospital, New Westminster, BC, Canada. 2. Department of Paediatrics, Mount Sinai Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada. 3. Department of Pediatrics, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada. 4. Neonatal Intensive Care Unit, Surrey Memorial Hospital, Surrey, BC, Canada. 5. Department of Pediatrics, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine the effect of concomitant administration of prophylactic indomethacin and early enteral feeds on the risk of spontaneous intestinal perforation (SIP) in extremely low-birth-weight (ELBW) infants, and to describe the variation in prophylactic indomethacin use in Canada. STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective cohort study of 4268 ELBW infants born at <30 weeks' gestation admitted to Canadian neonatal units between 2010 and 2014 was conducted. Prophylactic indomethacin (I+ or I-, administered within 24 h) and early feeding (E+ or E-, initiated in the first 2 days) exposures were studied concurrently and independently. The primary outcomes were SIP and death before discharge. Adjusted odds ratios (aORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. RESULTS: Compared with the I-/E+ reference group (n=1829), infants in I+/E+ (n=285; aOR 2.92, 95% CI 1.41 to 6.08) and I+/E- (n=213; aOR 2.84, 95% CI 1.35 to 5.98) groups had higher odds of SIP, whereas those in the I-/E- group had similar odds (n=1941; aOR 1.37, 95% CI 0.88 to 2.14). Odds of SIP were higher in the indomethacin exposed group (I+) compared with the unexposed (I-) group when controlled for early feeding (aOR 2.43, 95% CI 1.41 to 4.19), but not in the early feeding group when controlled for indomethacin. The use of prophylactic indomethacin ranged from 0% usage in 13 sites to 78% use in one site. CONCLUSION: Prophylactic indomethacin was associated with increased odds of SIP independently from early feeding in this cohort; however, early enteral feeding was not associated with SIP. Marked variation in the use of prophylactic indomethacin was identified.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the effect of concomitant administration of prophylactic indomethacin and early enteral feeds on the risk of spontaneous intestinal perforation (SIP) in extremely low-birth-weight (ELBW) infants, and to describe the variation in prophylactic indomethacin use in Canada. STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective cohort study of 4268 ELBW infants born at <30 weeks' gestation admitted to Canadian neonatal units between 2010 and 2014 was conducted. Prophylactic indomethacin (I+ or I-, administered within 24 h) and early feeding (E+ or E-, initiated in the first 2 days) exposures were studied concurrently and independently. The primary outcomes were SIP and death before discharge. Adjusted odds ratios (aORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. RESULTS: Compared with the I-/E+ reference group (n=1829), infants in I+/E+ (n=285; aOR 2.92, 95% CI 1.41 to 6.08) and I+/E- (n=213; aOR 2.84, 95% CI 1.35 to 5.98) groups had higher odds of SIP, whereas those in the I-/E- group had similar odds (n=1941; aOR 1.37, 95% CI 0.88 to 2.14). Odds of SIP were higher in the indomethacin exposed group (I+) compared with the unexposed (I-) group when controlled for early feeding (aOR 2.43, 95% CI 1.41 to 4.19), but not in the early feeding group when controlled for indomethacin. The use of prophylactic indomethacin ranged from 0% usage in 13 sites to 78% use in one site. CONCLUSION: Prophylactic indomethacin was associated with increased odds of SIP independently from early feeding in this cohort; however, early enteral feeding was not associated with SIP. Marked variation in the use of prophylactic indomethacin was identified.
Authors: A R Stark; W A Carlo; J E Tyson; L A Papile; L L Wright; S Shankaran; E F Donovan; W Oh; C R Bauer; S Saha; W K Poole; B J Stoll Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2001-01-11 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: R Sharma; M L Hudak; J J Tepas; P S Wludyka; R-J Teng; L K Hastings; W H Renfro; W J Marvin Journal: J Perinatol Date: 2010-04-22 Impact factor: 2.521
Authors: Kristi L Watterberg; Jeffrey S Gerdes; Cynthia H Cole; Susan W Aucott; Elizabeth H Thilo; Mark C Mammel; Robert J Couser; Jeffery S Garland; Henry J Rozycki; Corinne L Leach; Conra Backstrom; Michele L Shaffer Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2004-12 Impact factor: 7.124
Authors: Sanjay Chawla; Girija Natarajan; Abbot R Laptook; Dhuly Chowdhury; Edward F Bell; Namasivayam Ambalavanan; Waldemar A Carlo; Marie Gantz; Abhik Das; Jose L Tapia; Heidi M Harmon; Seetha Shankaran Journal: Pediatr Res Date: 2022-03-17 Impact factor: 3.953
Authors: Souvik Mitra; Courtney E Gardner; Abigale MacLellan; Tim Disher; Danielle M Styranko; Marsha Campbell-Yeo; Stefan Kuhle; Bradley C Johnston; Jon Dorling Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2022-04-01
Authors: Ijab Khanafer-Larocque; Amuchou Soraisham; Amelie Stritzke; Essa Al Awad; Sumesh Thomas; Prashanth Murthy; Majeeda Kamaluddeen; James N Scott; Khorshid Mohammad Journal: Front Pediatr Date: 2019-10-22 Impact factor: 3.418
Authors: Carl H Backes; Kevin D Hill; Elaine L Shelton; Jonathan L Slaughter; Tamorah R Lewis; Dany E Weisz; May Ling Mah; Shazia Bhombal; Charles V Smith; Patrick J McNamara; William E Benitz; Vidu Garg Journal: J Am Heart Assoc Date: 2022-09-03 Impact factor: 6.106