Yogen Singh1,2, Shazia Bhombal3, Anup Katheria4, Cecile Tissot5, María V Fraga6. 1. Department of Pediatrics - Neonatology and Pediatric Cardiology, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge University Hospitals, Box 402, NICU, Biomedical Campus, Hills Road, Cambridge, CB2 0QQ, UK. Yogen.Singh@nhs.net. 2. Departmet of Pediatrics, Division of Neonatology, Loma Linda University School of Medicine, Loma Linda, CA, USA. Yogen.Singh@nhs.net. 3. Department of Pediatrics, Division of Neonatal and Behavioral Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA. 4. Department of Neonatology, Sharp Mary Birch Hospital for Women & Newborns, San Diego, CA, USA. 5. Centre de Pediatrie, Clinique des Grangettes, 7 ch des Grangettes, 1224 Chêne-Bougeries, Geneva, Switzerland. 6. Department of Pediatrics, Division of Neonatology, Children's Hospital of Philadelphia and Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, USA.
Abstract
Cardiac point of care ultrasound (POCUS) is increasingly being utilized in neonatal intensive care units to provide information in real time to aid clinical decision making. While training programs and scope of practice have been well defined for other specialties, such as adult critical care and emergency medicine, there is a lack of structure for neonatal cardiac POCUS. A more comprehensive and advanced hemodynamic evaluation by a neonatologist has previously published its own clinical guidelines and specific rigorous training programs have been established to achieve competency in neonatal hemodynamics. However, it is becoming increasingly evident that access and training for basic cardiac assessment by ultrasound enhances bedside clinical care for specific indications. Recently, expert consensus POCUS guidelines for use in neonatal and pediatric intensive care endorsed by the European Society of Pediatric and Neonatal Intensive Care (ESPNIC) have been published to guide the clinicians in using POCUS for specific indications, though the line between cardiac POCUS and advanced hemodynamic evaluation remains somewhat fluid. Conclusion: This article is focused on neonatal cardiac POCUS and its evolution, value, and limitations in the modern neonatal clinical practice. Cardiac POCUS can provide physiological and hemodynamic information in making clinical decisions while dealing with neonatal emergencies. However, it should be applied only for the specific indications and should be performed by a clinician trained in cardiac POCUS. There is an urgent need of developing cardiac POCUS curriculum and certification to support a widespread and safe use in neonates. What is Known: • International training guidelines and curriculum have been published for neonatologist-performed echocardiography (NPE) or targeted neonatal echocardiography (TNE). • International evidence-based guidelines for use of point of care ultrasound (POCUS) in neonates and children have been recently published. What is New: • Cardiac POCUS is increasingly being incorporated in neonatal practice for emergency situations. However, one must be aware of its specific indications and limitations, especially for the neonatal clinical practice. • Cardiac POCUS and NPE/TNE are continuum of cardiac imaging with different indications and training requirements.
Cardiac point of care ultrasound (POCUS) is increasingly being utilized in neonatal intensive care units to provide information in real time to aid clinical decision making. While training programs and scope of practice have been well defined for other specialties, such as adult critical care and emergency medicine, there is a lack of structure for neonatal cardiac POCUS. A more comprehensive and advanced hemodynamic evaluation by a neonatologist has previously published its own clinical guidelines and specific rigorous training programs have been established to achieve competency in neonatal hemodynamics. However, it is becoming increasingly evident that access and training for basic cardiac assessment by ultrasound enhances bedside clinical care for specific indications. Recently, expert consensus POCUS guidelines for use in neonatal and pediatric intensive care endorsed by the European Society of Pediatric and Neonatal Intensive Care (ESPNIC) have been published to guide the clinicians in using POCUS for specific indications, though the line between cardiac POCUS and advanced hemodynamic evaluation remains somewhat fluid. Conclusion: This article is focused on neonatal cardiac POCUS and its evolution, value, and limitations in the modern neonatal clinical practice. Cardiac POCUS can provide physiological and hemodynamic information in making clinical decisions while dealing with neonatal emergencies. However, it should be applied only for the specific indications and should be performed by a clinician trained in cardiac POCUS. There is an urgent need of developing cardiac POCUS curriculum and certification to support a widespread and safe use in neonates. What is Known: • International training guidelines and curriculum have been published for neonatologist-performed echocardiography (NPE) or targeted neonatal echocardiography (TNE). • International evidence-based guidelines for use of point of care ultrasound (POCUS) in neonates and children have been recently published. What is New: • Cardiac POCUS is increasingly being incorporated in neonatal practice for emergency situations. However, one must be aware of its specific indications and limitations, especially for the neonatal clinical practice. • Cardiac POCUS and NPE/TNE are continuum of cardiac imaging with different indications and training requirements.
Authors: Martien H Humblet; Yogen Singh; Cecile Tissot; Daniele De Luca; Piet L Leroy Journal: Pediatr Crit Care Med Date: 2020-09 Impact factor: 3.624
Authors: Nick Evans; Veronique Gournay; Fernando Cabanas; Martin Kluckow; Tina Leone; Alan Groves; Patrick McNamara; Luc Mertens Journal: Semin Fetal Neonatal Med Date: 2011-02 Impact factor: 3.926
Authors: Thomas W Conlon; Akira Nishisaki; Yogen Singh; Shazia Bhombal; Daniele De Luca; David O Kessler; Erik R Su; Aaron E Chen; María V Fraga Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2019-09-03 Impact factor: 7.124
Authors: Irene W Y Ma; Shane Arishenkoff; Jeffrey Wiseman; Janeve Desy; Jonathan Ailon; Leslie Martin; Mirek Otremba; Samantha Halman; Patrick Willemot; Marcus Blouw Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2017-05-11 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Yogen Singh; Cecile Tissot; María V Fraga; Nadya Yousef; Rafael Gonzalez Cortes; Jorge Lopez; Joan Sanchez-de-Toledo; Joe Brierley; Juan Mayordomo Colunga; Dusan Raffaj; Eduardo Da Cruz; Philippe Durand; Peter Kenderessy; Hans-Joerg Lang; Akira Nishisaki; Martin C Kneyber; Pierre Tissieres; Thomas W Conlon; Daniele De Luca Journal: Crit Care Date: 2020-02-24 Impact factor: 9.097