Automation of oxygen titration in preterm infants: Current evidence and future challenges

Monitoring SpO2: The Basics of Retinopathy of Prematurity (Back to Basics) and Targeting Oxygen Saturation

Oxygen (O2) is a drug frequently used in newborn care. Adverse effects of hypoxia are well known but the damaging effects of excess oxygen administration and oxidative stress have only been studied in the last 2 decades. Many negative effects have been described, including retinopathy of prematurity . Noninvasive pulse oximetry (SpO2) is useful to detect hypoxemia but requires careful evaluation and understanding of the frequently changing relationship between O2 and hemoglobin to prevent hyperoxemia. Intention to treat SpO2 ranges should be individualized for every newborn receiving supplemental O2, according to gestational age, post-natal age, and clinical condition.

Prolonged use of closed-loop inspired oxygen support in preterm infants: a randomised controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

This randomised study in preterm infants on non-invasive respiratory support investigated the effectiveness of automated oxygen control (A-FiO2) in keeping the oxygen saturation (SpO2) within a target range (TR) during a 28-day period compared with manual titration (M-FiO2).

DESIGN

A single-centre randomised control trial.

SETTING

A level III neonatal intensive care unit.

PATIENTS

Preterm infants (<28 weeks' gestation) on non-invasive respiratory support.

INTERVENTIONS

A-FiO2 versus M-FiO2 control.

METHODS

Main outcomes were the proportion of time spent and median area of episodes in the TR, hyperoxaemia, hypoxaemia and the trend over 28 days using a linear random intercept model.

RESULTS

23 preterm infants (median gestation 25.7 weeks; birth weight 820 g) were randomised. Compared with M-FiO2, the time spent within TR was higher in the A-FiO2 group (68.7% vs 48.0%, p<0.001). Infants in the A-FiO2 group spent less time in hyperoxaemia (13.8% vs 37.7%, p<0.001), but no difference was found in hypoxaemia. The time-based analyses showed that the A-FiO2 efficacy may differ over time, especially for hypoxaemia. Compared with the M-FiO2 group, the A-FiO2 group had a larger intercept but with an inversed slope for the daily median area below the TR (intercept 70.1 vs 36.3; estimate/day -0.70 vs 0.69, p<0.001).

CONCLUSION

A-FiO2 control was superior to manual control in keeping preterm infants on non-invasive respiratory support in a prespecified TR over a period of 28 days. This improvement may come at the expense of increased time below the TR in the first days after initiating A-FiO2 control.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NTR6731.

Automated oxygen delivery for preterm infants with respiratory dysfunction

BACKGROUND

Many preterm infants require respiratory support to maintain an optimal level of oxygenation, as oxygen levels both below and above the optimal range are associated with adverse outcomes. Optimal titration of oxygen therapy for these infants presents a major challenge, especially in neonatal intensive care units (NICUs) with suboptimal staffing. Devices that offer automated oxygen delivery during respiratory support of neonates have been developed since the 1970s, and individual trials have evaluated their effectiveness.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of automated oxygen delivery systems, embedded within a ventilator or oxygen delivery device, for preterm infants with respiratory dysfunction who require respiratory support or supplemental oxygen therapy.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, CINAHL, and clinical trials databases without language or publication date restrictions on 23 January 2023. We also checked the reference lists of retrieved articles for other potentially eligible trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials and randomised cross-over trials that compared automated oxygen delivery versus manual oxygen delivery, or that compared different automated oxygen delivery systems head-to-head, in preterm infants (born before 37 weeks' gestation).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methods. Our main outcomes were time (%) in desired oxygen saturation (SpO2) range, all-cause in-hospital mortality by 36 weeks' postmenstrual age, severe retinopathy of prematurity (ROP), and neurodevelopmental outcomes at approximately two years' corrected age. We expressed our results using mean difference (MD), standardised mean difference (SMD), and risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We used GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 18 studies (27 reports, 457 infants), of which 13 (339 infants) contributed data to meta-analyses. We identified 13 ongoing studies. We evaluated three comparisons: automated oxygen delivery versus routine manual oxygen delivery (16 studies), automated oxygen delivery versus enhanced manual oxygen delivery with increased staffing (three studies), and one automated system versus another (two studies). Most studies were at low risk of bias for blinding of personnel and outcome assessment, incomplete outcome data, and selective outcome reporting; and half of studies were at low risk of bias for random sequence generation and allocation concealment. However, most were at high risk of bias in an important domain specific to cross-over trials, as only two of 16 cross-over trials provided separate outcome data for each period of the intervention (before and after cross-over). Automated oxygen delivery versus routine manual oxygen delivery Automated delivery compared with routine manual oxygen delivery probably increases time (%) in the desired SpO2 range (MD 13.54%, 95% CI 11.69 to 15.39; I2 = 80%; 11 studies, 284 infants; moderate-certainty evidence). No studies assessed in-hospital mortality. Automated oxygen delivery compared to routine manual oxygen delivery may have little or no effect on risk of severe ROP (RR 0.24, 95% CI 0.03 to 1.94; 1 study, 39 infants; low-certainty evidence). No studies assessed neurodevelopmental outcomes. Automated oxygen delivery versus enhanced manual oxygen delivery There may be no clear difference in time (%) in the desired SpO2 range between infants who receive automated oxygen delivery and infants who receive manual oxygen delivery (MD 7.28%, 95% CI -1.63 to 16.19; I2 = 0%; 2 studies, 19 infants; low-certainty evidence). No studies assessed in-hospital mortality, severe ROP, or neurodevelopmental outcomes. Revised closed-loop automatic control algorithm (CLACfast) versus original closed-loop automatic control algorithm (CLACslow) CLACfast allowed up to 120 automated adjustments per hour, whereas CLACslow allowed up to 20 automated adjustments per hour. CLACfast may result in little or no difference in time (%) in the desired SpO2 range compared to CLACslow (MD 3.00%, 95% CI -3.99 to 9.99; 1 study, 19 infants; low-certainty evidence). No studies assessed in-hospital mortality, severe ROP, or neurodevelopmental outcomes. OxyGenie compared to CLiO2 Data from a single small study were presented as medians and interquartile ranges and were not suitable for meta-analysis.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Automated oxygen delivery compared to routine manual oxygen delivery probably increases time in desired SpO2 ranges in preterm infants on respiratory support. However, it is unclear whether this translates into important clinical benefits. The evidence on clinical outcomes such as severe retinopathy of prematurity are of low certainty, with little or no differences between groups. There is insufficient evidence to reach any firm conclusions on the effectiveness of automated oxygen delivery compared to enhanced manual oxygen delivery or CLACfast compared to CLACslow. Future studies should include important short- and long-term clinical outcomes such as mortality, severe ROP, bronchopulmonary dysplasia/chronic lung disease, intraventricular haemorrhage, periventricular leukomalacia, patent ductus arteriosus, necrotising enterocolitis, and long-term neurodevelopmental outcomes. The ideal study design for this evaluation is a parallel-group randomised controlled trial. Studies should clearly describe staffing levels, especially in the manual arm, to enable an assessment of reproducibility according to resources in various settings. The data of the 13 ongoing studies, when made available, may change our conclusions, including the implications for practice and research.

The role of oxygen in the development and treatment of bronchopulmonary dysplasia

Oxygen (O2) is crucial for both the development and treatment of one of the most important consequences of prematurity: bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD). In fetal life, the hypoxic environment is important for alveolar development and maturation. After birth, O2 becomes a double-edged sword. While O2 is needed to prevent hypoxia, it also causes oxidative stress leading to a plethora of morbidities, including retinopathy and BPD. The advent of continuous O2 monitoring with pulse oximeters has allowed clinicians to recognize the narrow therapeutic margins of oxygenation for the preterm infant, but more knowledge is needed to understand what these ranges are at different stages of the preterm infant's life, including at birth, in the neonatal intensive care unit and after hospital discharge. Future research, especially in innovative technologies such as automated O2 control and remote oximetry, will improve the understanding and treatment of the O2 needs of infants with BPD.

Automatic oxygen control for reducing extremes of oxygen saturation: a randomised controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of the automatic oxygen control (A-Fio₂) in reducing the percentage of time spent in severe hypoxaemia (Spo₂ <80%) in preterm infants for the time period on invasive ventilation and/or nasal continuous positive airway pressure (NCPAP) delivered by AVEA ventilator.

DESIGN

A parallel arm randomised controlled trial.

SETTING

A level-III neonatal intensive care unit.

PATIENTS

Preterm infants (<33 weeks birth gestation) who received invasive ventilation or NCPAP in the first 72 hours of age.

INTERVENTIONS

A-Fio₂ vs manual (M-Fio₂) oxygen control.

OUTCOMES

The primary outcome of the study was percentage of time spent in severe hypoxaemia (Spo₂ <80%).

RESULTS

44 infants were randomised to either A-Fio₂ or M-Fio₂ arm and continued in the study for the period of respiratory support (invasive ventilation and/or NCPAP). The total number of study days in A-Fio2 and M-Fio₂ arm were 194 and 204 days, respectively. The percentage of time spent in Spo₂ <80% was significantly lower with A-Fio₂ compared with M-Fio₂ (median of 0.1% (IQR: 0.07-0.7) vs 0.6% (0.2-2); p=0.03). The number of prolonged episodes (>60 s) of Spo₂ <80% per day was also significantly lower in A-Fio₂ (0.3 (0.0-2) vs 2 (0.6-6); p=0.02).

CONCLUSION

A-Fio₂ was associated with statistically significant reduction in the percentage of time spent in severe hypoxaemia when compared with M-Fio₂ in preterm infants receiving respiratory support.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT04223258.

Comparison of two automated oxygen controllers in oxygen targeting in preterm infants during admission: an observational study

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effect of two different automated oxygen control devices on time preterm infants spent in different oxygen saturation (SpO₂) ranges during their entire stay in the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU).

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study of prospectively collected data.

SETTING

Tertiary level neonatal unit in the Netherlands.

PATIENTS

Preterm infants (OxyGenie 75 infants, CLiO₂ 111 infants) born at 24-29 weeks' gestation receiving at least 72 hours of respiratory support between October 2015 and November 2020.

INTERVENTIONS

Inspired oxygen concentration was titrated by the OxyGenie controller (SLE6000 ventilator) between February 2019 and November 2020 and the CLiO₂ controller (AVEA ventilator) between October 2015 and December 2018 as standard of care.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Time spent within SpO₂ target range (TR, 91-95% for either epoch) and other SpO₂ ranges.

RESULTS

Time spent within the SpO₂ TR when receiving supplemental oxygen was higher during OxyGenie control (median 71.5 [IQR 64.6-77.0]% vs 51.3 [47.3-58.5]%, p<0.001). Infants under OxyGenie control spent less time in hypoxic and hyperoxic ranges (SpO₂<80%: 0.7 [0.4-1.4]% vs 1.2 [0.7-2.3]%, p<0.001; SpO2>98%: 1.0 [0.5-2.4]% vs 4.0 [2.0-7.9]%, p<0.001). Both groups received a similar FiO₂ (29.5 [28.0-33.2]% vs 29.6 [27.7-32.1]%, p=not significant).

CONCLUSIONS

Oxygen saturation targeting was significantly different in the OxyGenie epoch in preterm infants, with less time in hypoxic and hyperoxic SpO₂ ranges during their stay in the NICU.

Statistical Description of SaO2–SpO2 Relationship for Model of Oxygenation in Premature Infants

A pulse oximeter model linking arterial (SaO2) and peripheral (SpO2) oxygen saturation is the terminal part of a mathematical model of neonatal oxygen transport. Previous studies have confirmed the overestimation of oxygen saturation measured by pulse oximetry in neonates compared to arterial oxygen saturation and the large variability of measured values over time caused by measurement inaccuracies. This work aimed to determine the SpO2 measurement noise that affects the biased SpO2 value at each time point and integrate the noise description with the systematic bias between SaO2 and SpO2. The SaO2–SpO2 bias was based on previously published clinical data from pathological patients younger than 60 days requiring ventilatory support. The statistical properties of the random SpO2 measurement noise were estimated from the SpO2 continuous recordings of 21 pathological and 21 physiological neonates. The result of the work is a comprehensive characterization of the properties of a pulse oximeter model describing the transfer of the input SaO2 value to the output SpO2 value, including the bias and noise typical for the bedside monitoring of neonates. These results will help to improve a computer model of neonatal oxygen transport.

Automated Oxygen Delivery in Neonatal Intensive Care

Oxygen is the most common drug used in the neonatal intensive care. It has a narrow therapeutic range in preterm infants. Too high (hyperoxemia) or low oxygen (hypoxemia) is associated with adverse neonatal outcomes. It is not only prudent to maintain oxygen saturations in the target range, but also to avoid extremes of oxygen saturations. In routine practice when done manually by the staff, it is challenging to maintain oxygen saturations within the target range. Automatic control of oxygen delivery is now feasible and has shown to improve the time spent with in the target range of oxygen saturations. In addition, it also helps to avoid extremes of oxygen saturation. However, there are no studies that evaluated the clinical outcomes with automatic control of oxygen delivery. In this narrative review article, we aim to present the current evidence on automatic oxygen control and the future directions.