Neonatal heroin withdrawal syndrome; evaluation of different pharmacological treatments

Opioid treatment for opioid withdrawal in newborn infants

BACKGROUND

Neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS) due to opioid withdrawal may result in disruption of the mother-infant relationship, sleep-wake abnormalities, feeding difficulties, weight loss, seizures and neurodevelopmental problems.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness and safety of using an opioid for treatment of NAS due to withdrawal from opioids in newborn infants.

SEARCH METHODS

We ran an updated search on 17 September 2020 in CENTRAL via Cochrane Register of Studies Web and MEDLINE via Ovid. We also searched clinical trials databases, conference proceedings and the reference lists of retrieved articles for eligible trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), quasi- and cluster-RCTs which enrolled infants born to mothers with opioid dependence and who were experiencing NAS requiring treatment with an opioid.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three review authors independently assessed trial eligibility and risk of bias, and independently extracted data. We used the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 16 trials (1110 infants) with NAS secondary to maternal opioid use in pregnancy. Seven studies at low risk of bias were included in sensitivity analysis. Opioid versus no treatment / usual care: a single trial (80 infants) of morphine and supportive care versus supportive care alone reported no difference in treatment failure (risk ratio (RR) 1.29, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.41 to 4.07; very low certainty evidence). No infant had a seizure. The trial did not report mortality, neurodevelopmental disability and adverse events. Morphine increased days hospitalisation (mean difference (MD) 15.00, 95% CI 8.86 to 21.14; very low certainty evidence) and treatment (MD 12.50, 95% CI 7.52 to 17.48; very low certainty evidence), but decreased days to regain birthweight (MD -2.80, 95% CI -5.33 to -0.27) and duration (minutes) of supportive care each day (MD -197.20, 95% CI -274.15 to -120.25). Morphine versus methadone: there was no difference in treatment failure (RR 1.59, 95% CI 0.95 to 2.67; 2 studies, 147 infants; low certainty evidence). Seizures, neonatal or infant mortality and neurodevelopmental disability were not reported. A single study reported no difference in days hospitalisation (MD 1.40, 95% CI -3.08 to 5.88; 116 infants; low certainty evidence), whereas data from two studies found an increase in days treatment (MD 2.71, 95% CI 0.22 to 5.21; 147 infants; low certainty) for infants treated with morphine. A single study reported no difference in breastfeeding, adverse events, or out of home placement. Morphine versus sublingual buprenorphine: there was no difference in treatment failure (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.36 to 1.74; 3 studies, 113 infants; very low certainty evidence). Neonatal or infant mortality and neurodevelopmental disability were not reported. There was moderate certainty evidence of an increase in days hospitalisation (MD 11.45, 95% CI 5.89 to 17.01; 3 studies, 113 infants), and days treatment (MD 12.79, 95% CI 7.57 to 18.00; 3 studies, 112 infants) for infants treated with morphine. A single adverse event (seizure) was reported in infants exposed to buprenorphine. Morphine versus diluted tincture of opium (DTO): a single study (33 infants) reported no difference in days hospitalisation, days treatment or weight gain (low certainty evidence). Opioid versus clonidine: a single study (31 infants) reported no infant with treatment failure in either group. This study did not report seizures, neonatal or infant mortality and neurodevelopmental disability. There was low certainty evidence for no difference in days hospitalisation or days treatment. This study did not report adverse events. Opioid versus diazepam: there was a reduction in treatment failure from use of an opioid (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.80; 2 studies, 86 infants; low certainty evidence). Seizures, neonatal or infant mortality and neurodevelopmental disability were not reported. A single study of 34 infants comparing methadone versus diazepam reported no difference in days hospitalisation or days treatment (very low certainty evidence). Adverse events were not reported. Opioid versus phenobarbital: there was a reduction in treatment failure from use of an opioid (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.35 to 0.74; 6 studies, 458 infants; moderate certainty evidence). Subgroup analysis found a reduction in treatment failure in trials titrating morphine to ≧ 0.5 mg/kg/day (RR 0.21, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.45; 3 studies, 230 infants), whereas a single study using morphine < 0.5 mg/kg/day reported no difference compared to use of phenobarbital (subgroup difference P = 0.05). Neonatal or infant mortality and neurodevelopmental disability were not reported. A single study (111 infants) of paregoric versus phenobarbital reported seven infants with seizures in the phenobarbital group, whereas no seizures were reported in two studies (170 infants) comparing morphine to phenobarbital. There was no difference in days hospitalisation or days treatment. A single study (96 infants) reported no adverse events in either group. Opioid versus chlorpromazine: there was a reduction in treatment failure from use of morphine versus chlorpromazine (RR 0.08, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.62; 1 study, 90 infants; moderate certainty evidence). No seizures were reported in either group. There was low certainty evidence for no difference in days treatment. This trial reported no adverse events in either group. None of the included studies reported time to control of NAS. Data for duration and severity of NAS were limited, and we were unable to use these data in quantitative synthesis.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Compared to supportive care alone, the addition of an opioid may increase duration of hospitalisation and treatment, but may reduce days to regain birthweight and the duration of supportive care each day. Use of an opioid may reduce treatment failure compared to phenobarbital, diazepam or chlorpromazine. Use of an opioid may have little or no effect on duration of hospitalisation or treatment compared to use of phenobarbital, diazepam or chlorpromazine. The type of opioid used may have little or no effect on the treatment failure rate. Use of buprenorphine probably reduces duration of hospitalisation and treatment compared to morphine, but there are no data for time to control NAS with buprenorphine, and insufficient evidence to determine safety. There is insufficient evidence to determine the effectiveness and safety of clonidine.

Sedatives for opioid withdrawal in newborn infants

BACKGROUND

Neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS) due to opioid withdrawal may result in disruption of the mother-infant relationship, sleep-wake abnormalities, feeding difficulties, weight loss, seizures and neurodevelopmental problems.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness and safety of using a sedative versus control (placebo, usual treatment or non-pharmacological treatment) for NAS due to withdrawal from opioids and determine which type of sedative is most effective and safe for NAS due to withdrawal from opioids.

SEARCH METHODS

We ran an updated search on 17 September 2020 in CENTRAL via CRS Web and MEDLINE via Ovid. We searched clinical trials databases, conference proceedings and the reference lists of retrieved articles for randomised controlled trials and quasi-randomised trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included trials enrolling infants with NAS born to mothers with an opioid dependence with more than 80% follow-up and using randomised, quasi-randomised and cluster-randomised allocation to sedative or control.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three review authors assessed trial eligibility and risk of bias, and independently extracted data. We used the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 10 trials (581 infants) with NAS secondary to maternal opioid use in pregnancy. There were multiple comparisons of different sedatives and regimens. There were limited data available for use in sensitivity analysis of studies at low risk of bias. Phenobarbital versus supportive care: one study reported there may be little or no difference in treatment failure with phenobarbital and supportive care versus supportive care alone (risk ratio (RR) 2.73, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.94 to 7.94; 62 participants; very low-certainty evidence). No infant had a clinical seizure. The study did not report mortality, neurodevelopmental disability and adverse events. There may be an increase in days' hospitalisation and treatment from use of phenobarbital (hospitalisation: mean difference (MD) 20.80, 95% CI 13.64 to 27.96; treatment: MD 17.90, 95% CI 11.98 to 23.82; both 62 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Phenobarbital versus diazepam: there may be a reduction in treatment failure with phenobarbital versus diazepam (RR 0.39, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.62; 139 participants; 2 studies; low-certainty evidence). The studies did not report mortality, neurodevelopmental disability and adverse events. One study reported there may be little or no difference in days' hospitalisation and treatment (hospitalisation: MD 3.89, 95% CI -1.20 to 8.98; 32 participants; treatment: MD 4.30, 95% CI -0.73 to 9.33; 31 participants; both low-certainty evidence). Phenobarbital versus chlorpromazine: there may be a reduction in treatment failure with phenobarbital versus chlorpromazine (RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.92; 138 participants; 2 studies; very low-certainty evidence), and no infant had a seizure. The studies did not report mortality and neurodevelopmental disability. One study reported there may be little or no difference in days' hospitalisation (MD 7.00, 95% CI -3.51 to 17.51; 87 participants; low-certainty evidence) and 0/100 infants had an adverse event. Phenobarbital and opioid versus opioid alone: one study reported no infants with treatment failure and no clinical seizures in either group (low-certainty evidence). The study did not report mortality, neurodevelopmental disability and adverse events. One study reported there may be a reduction in days' hospitalisation for infants treated with phenobarbital and opioid (MD -43.50, 95% CI -59.18 to -27.82; 20 participants; low-certainty evidence). Clonidine and opioid versus opioid alone: one study reported there may be little or no difference in treatment failure with clonidine and dilute tincture of opium (DTO) versus DTO alone (RR 0.09, 95% CI 0.01 to 1.59; 80 participants; very low-certainty evidence). All five infants with treatment failure were in the DTO group. There may be little or no difference in seizures (RR 0.14, 95% CI 0.01 to 2.68; 80 participants; very low-certainty evidence). All three infants with seizures were in the DTO group. There may be little or no difference in mortality after discharge (RR 7.00, 95% CI 0.37 to 131.28; 80 participants; very low-certainty evidence). All three deaths were in the clonidine and DTO group. The study did not report neurodevelopmental disability. There may be little or no difference in days' treatment (MD -4.00, 95% CI -8.33 to 0.33; 80 participants; very low-certainty evidence). One adverse event occurred in the clonidine and DTO group. There may be little or no difference in rebound NAS after stopping treatment, although all seven cases were in the clonidine and DTO group. Clonidine and opioid versus phenobarbital and opioid: there may be little or no difference in treatment failure (RR 2.27, 95% CI 0.98 to 5.25; 2 studies, 93 participants; very low-certainty evidence). One study reported one infant in the clonidine and morphine group had a seizure, and there were no infant mortalities. The studies did not report neurodevelopmental disability. There may be an increase in days' hospitalisation and days' treatment with clonidine and opioid versus phenobarbital and opioid(hospitalisation: MD 7.13, 95% CI 6.38 to 7.88; treatment: MD 7.57, 95% CI 3.97 to 11.17; both 2 studies, 91 participants; low-certainty evidence). There may be little or no difference in adverse events (RR 1.55, 95% CI 0.44 to 5.40; 2 studies, 93 participants; very low-certainty evidence). However, there was oversedation only in the phenobarbital and morphine group; and hypotension, rebound hypertension and rebound NAS only in the clonidine and morphine group.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is very low-certainty evidence that phenobarbital increases duration of hospitalisation and treatment, but reduces days to regain birthweight and duration of supportive care each day compared to supportive care alone. There is low-certainty evidence that phenobarbital reduces treatment failure compared to diazepam and very low-certainty evidence that  phenobarbital reduces treatment failure compared to chlorpromazine. There is low-certainty evidence of an increase in days' hospitalisation and days' treatment with clonidine and opioid compared to phenobarbital and opioid. There are insufficient data to determine the safety and incidence of adverse events for infants treated with combinations of opioids and sedatives including phenobarbital and clonidine.

Opiate treatment for opiate withdrawal in newborn infants

BACKGROUND

Neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS) due to opiate withdrawal may result in disruption of the mother-infant relationship, sleep-wake abnormalities, feeding difficulties, weight loss and seizures.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness and safety of using an opiate compared to a sedative or non-pharmacological treatment for treatment of NAS due to withdrawal from opiates.

SEARCH STRATEGY

The review was updated in 2010 with additional searches CENTRAL, MEDLINE and EMBASE supplemented by searches of conference abstracts and citation lists of published articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized or quasi-randomized controlled trials of opiate treatment in infants with NAS born to mothers with opiate dependence.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Each author assessed study quality and extracted data independently.

MAIN RESULTS

Nine studies enrolling 645 infants met inclusion criteria. There were substantial methodological concerns in all studies comparing an opiate with a sedative. Two small studies comparing different opiates were of good methodology.Opiate (morphine) versus supportive care (one study): A reduction in time to regain birth weight and duration of supportive care and a significant increase in hospital stay was noted.Opiate versus phenobarbitone (four studies): Meta-analysis found no significant difference in treatment failure. One study reported opiate treatment resulted in a significant reduction in treatment failure in infants of mothers using only opiates. One study reported a significant reduction in days treatment and admission to the nursery for infants receiving morphine. One study reported a reduction in seizures, of borderline statistical significance, with the use of opiate.Opiate versus diazepam (two studies): Meta-analysis found a significant reduction in treatment failure with the use of opiate.Different opiates (six studies): there is insufficient data to determine safety or efficacy of any specific opiate compared to another opiate.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Opiates compared to supportive care may reduce time to regain birth weight and duration of supportive care but increase duration of hospital stay. When compared to phenobarbitone, opiates may reduce the incidence of seizures but there is no evidence of effect on treatment failure. One study reported a reduction in duration of treatment and nursery admission for infants on morphine. Compared to diazepam, opiates reduce the incidence of treatment failure. A post-hoc analysis generates the hypothesis that initial opiate treatment may be restricted to infants of mothers who used opiates only. In view of the methodologic limitations of the included studies the conclusions of this review should be treated with caution.

Sedatives for opiate withdrawal in newborn infants

BACKGROUND

Neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS) due to opiate withdrawal may result in disruption of the mother-infant relationship, sleep-wake abnormalities, feeding difficulties, weight loss and seizures. Treatments used to ameliorate symptoms and reduce morbidity include opiates, sedatives and non-pharmacological treatments.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness and safety of using a sedative compared to a non-opiate control for NAS due to withdrawal from opiates, and to determine which type of sedative is most effective and safe.

SEARCH STRATEGY

This update included searches of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (Issue 1, 2010), MEDLINE 1966 to April 2010 and abstracts of conference proceedings.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Trials enrolling infants with NAS born to mothers with an opiate dependence with > 80% follow-up and using random or quasi-random allocation to sedative or control. Control could include another sedative or non-pharmacological treatment.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Each author assessed study quality and extracted data independently.

MAIN RESULTS

Seven studies enrolling 385 patients were included. There were substantial methodological concerns for most studies including the use of quasi-random allocation methods and sizeable, largely unexplained differences in reported numbers allocated to each group.One study reported phenobarbitone compared to supportive care alone did not reduce treatment failure or time to regain birthweight, but resulted in a significant reduction in duration of supportive care (MD -162.1 min/day, 95% CI -249.2, -75.1). Comparing phenobarbitone to diazepam, meta-analysis of two studies found phenobarbitone resulted in a significant reduction in treatment failure (typical RR 0.39, 95% CI 0.24, 0.62). Comparing phenobarbitone with chlorpromazine, one study reported no significant difference in treatment failure.In infants treated with an opiate, one study reported addition of clonidine resulted in no significant difference in treatment failure, seizures or mortality. In infants treated with an opiate, one study reported addition of phenobarbitone significantly reduced the proportion of time infants had a high abstinence severity score, duration of hospitalisation and maximal daily dose of opiate.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Infants with NAS due to opiate withdrawal should receive initial treatment with an opiate. Where a sedative is used, phenobarbitone should be used in preference to diazepam. In infants treated with an opiate, the addition of phenobarbitone or clonidine may reduce withdrawal severity. Further studies are needed to determine the role of sedatives in infants with NAS due to opiate withdrawal and the safety and efficacy of adding phenobarbitone or clonidine in infants treated with an opiate for NAS.

Treating pregnant women dependent on opioids is not the same as treating pregnancy and opioid dependence: a knowledge synthesis for better treatment for women and neonates

AIMS

Through a novel synthesis of the literature and our own clinical experience, we have derived a set of evidence-based recommendations for consideration as guidance in the management of opioid-dependent pregnant women and infants.

METHODS

PubMed literature searches were carried out to identify recent key publications in the areas of pregnancy and opioid dependence, neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS) prevention and treatment, multiple substance abuse and psychiatric comorbidity.

RESULTS

Pregnant women dependent on opioids require careful treatment to minimize harm to the fetus and neonate and improve maternal health. Applying multi-disciplinary treatment as early as possible, allowing medication maintenance and regular monitoring, benefits mother and child both in the short and the long term. However, there is a need for randomized clinical trials with sufficient sample sizes.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Opioid maintenance therapy is the recommended treatment approach during pregnancy. Treatment decisions must encompass the full clinical picture, with respect to frequent complications arising from psychiatric comorbidities and the concomitant consumption of other drugs. In addition to standardized approaches to pregnancy, equivalent attention must be given to the treatment of NAS, which occurs frequently after opioid medication.

CONCLUSION

Methodological flaws and inconsistencies confound interpretation of today's literature. Based on this synthesis of available evidence and our clinical experience, we propose recommendations for further discussion.

Management of neonatal abstinence syndrome in neonates born to opioid maintained women

Neonates born to opioid-maintained mothers are at risk of developing neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS), which often requires pharmacological treatment. This study examined the effect of opioid maintenance treatment on the incidence and timing of NAS, and compared two different NAS treatments (phenobarbital versus morphine hydrochloride). Fifty-three neonates born to opioid-maintained mothers were included in this study. The mothers received methadone (n=22), slow-release oral morphine (n=17) or buprenorphine (n=14) throughout pregnancy. Irrespective of maintenance treatment, all neonates showed APGAR scores comparable to infants of non-opioid dependent mothers. No difference was found between the three maintenance groups regarding neonatal weight, length or head circumference. Sixty percent (n=32) of neonates required treatment for NAS [68% in the methadone-maintained group (n=15), 82% in the morphine-maintained group (n=14), and 21% in the buprenorphine-maintained group (n=3)]. The mean duration from birth to requirement of NAS treatment was 33 h for the morphine-maintained group, 34 h for the buprenorphine-maintained group and 58 h for the methadone-maintained group. In neonates requiring NAS treatment, those receiving morphine required a significantly shorter mean duration of treatment (9.9 days) versus those treated with phenobarbital (17.7 days). Results suggest that morphine hydrochloride is preferable for neonates suffering NAS due to opioid withdrawal.

Management of the newborn infant affected by maternal opiates and other drugs of dependency

Illicit drug use during pregnancy is common and probably underestimated in the majority of published studies. The infant exposed to opiates or other drugs of dependency during intrauterine development is at risk for post-natal withdrawal as well as to long-term problems that are associated with drug-effects and often, adverse social circumstances. This article examines the early management of the infant and mother for detection and monitoring of drug-exposure, pharmacological intervention for withdrawal and the management of associated, particularly infective and psychosocial, problems. Practical concerns surrounding these issues are discussed and further research on psychosocial intervention to improve long-term outcome are much needed.

A retrospective study of length of hospital stay in infants treated for neonatal abstinence syndrome with methadone versus oral morphine preparations

PURPOSE

Length of hospital stay (LOS) of infants treated for neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS) with methadone was compared to LOS of those treated with an oral morphine preparation (OMP, neonatal morphine solution, or deodorized tincture of opium).

METHODS

A retrospective review of medical records of infants treated for NAS due to in utero exposure to methadone and/or illicit drugs such as heroin or morphine was performed for birthweight, neonatal abstinence scores, infant and maternal illicit drug exposure history, maternal methadone dose (if any), and details of treatment. Length of stay was the primary outcome measure.

RESULTS

Forty-six infants met the inclusion criteria. The median LOS of infants treated with methadone versus OMP was not significant (P > 0.05). Prolonged LOS was associated with larger pharmacological treatment doses required to control withdrawal symptoms, larger maternal methadone dose, and increased birthweight. After adjusting for these factors, exposure to opioids in utero, maternal nicotine use, hospital of treatment, severity of withdrawal symptoms, and foster care placement were not significantly associated with LOS in univariate or multivariate analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

These results suggest that infants treated with OMP or methadone have similar LOS. Longer LOS is associated with both higher maternal methadone doses and higher opioid treatment dose requirements after birth. The potential effect of maternal methadone dose on neonatal LOS should be considered when treating expectant mothers on methadone maintenance therapy.

Sedatives for opiate withdrawal in newborn infants

BACKGROUND

Neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS) due to opiate withdrawal may result in disruption of the mother-infant relationship, sleep-wake abnormalities, feeding difficulties, weight loss and seizures. Treatments used to ameliorate symptoms and reduce morbidity include opiates, sedatives and non-pharmacological treatments.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness and safety of using a sedative compared to a non-opiate control for NAS due to withdrawal from opiates, and to determine which type of sedative is most effective and safe.

SEARCH STRATEGY

The standard search strategy of the Neonatal Review Group was used. This update included searches of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, The Cochrane Library, Issue 1, 2005), MEDLINE 1966-March 2005 and abstracts of conference proceedings.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Trials enrolling infants with NAS born to mothers with an opiate dependence, with > 80% follow up and using random or quasi-random allocation to sedative or control. Control could include another sedative or non-pharmacological treatment.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Each author assessed study quality and extracted data independently. Primary outcomes included treatment failure (failure to achieve symptom control or use of additional drug treatment), seizure occurrence, mortality and neurodevelopment. Treatment effect was expressed using (RR), risk difference (RD), mean difference (MD) and weighted mean difference (WMD). Meta-analysis was performed using a fixed effect model.

MAIN RESULTS

Six studies enrolling a total of 305 patients met inclusion criteria (Coyle 2002; Finnegan 1984; Kahn 1969; Kaltenbach 1986; Khoo 1995; Madden 1977); however, two (Finnegan 1984; Kaltenbach 1986) may be sequential reports that include some identical patients. Methodological concerns included the use of quasi-random allocation methods in four studies, and sizeable, largely unexplained differences in reported numbers allocated to each group in three studies. Phenobarbitone compared to supportive care alone has not been shown to reduce treatment failure or time to regain birthweight (one study). However, the duration of supportive care given to infants was significantly reduced (MD -162.1 mins/day, 95% CI -249.2, -75.1). Comparing phenobarbitone to diazepam, meta-analysis of two studies found phenobarbitone produced a significant reduction in treatment failure (typical RR 0.39, 95% CI 0.24, 0.62). There was no significant difference in duration of treatment or hospital stay. Comparing phenobarbitone with chlorpromazine, one study found no significant difference in treatment failure rate. No data for neurodevelopment reported by treatment group of allocation were available. No trials were eligible that assessed clonidine for NAS. In infants treated with an opiate, a small quasi-random study reported a reduced severity of withdrawal. Infants were weaned from an opiate more quickly which allowed earlier hospital discharge and reduced hospital costs. These findings may reflect the low dose of opiate used for initial treatment and the policy of discharging infants home on phenobarbitone but not morphine.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In newborn infants with NAS, there is no evidence that phenobarbitone compared with supportive care alone reduces treatment failure; however, phenobarbitone may reduce the daily duration of supportive care needed. Phenobarbitone, compared to diazepam, reduces treatment failure. In infants treated with an opiate, the addition of phenobarbitone may reduce withdrawal severity. Further trials are required to determine if this finding is applicable when a higher initial dose of opiate is used, and determine the effects of phenobabritone on infant development. There is insufficient evidence to support the use of chlorpromazine or clonidine in newborn infants with NAS. Clonidine and chlorpromazine should only be used in the context of a randomised clinical trial. This review should be taken in conjunction with the review "Opiate treatment for opiate withdrawal in newborn infants" (Osborn 2002a) which indicates that an opiate is the preferred initial therapy for NAS.

Opiate treatment for opiate withdrawal in newborn infants

BACKGROUND

Neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS) due to opiate withdrawal may result in disruption of the mother-infant relationship, sleep-wake abnormalities, feeding difficulties, weight loss and seizures. Treatments used to ameliorate symptoms and reduce morbidity include opiates, sedatives and non-pharmacological treatments.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness and safety of using an opiate, compared to a sedative or non-pharmacological treatment, for treatment of NAS due to withdrawal from opiates.

SEARCH STRATEGY

The previous review was updated with additional searches of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, The Cochrane Library, Issue 1, 2005), MEDLINE (1966-December 2004) and EMBASE (1980-December 2004) supplemented by searches of conference abstracts and citation lists of published articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Trials enrolling infants with NAS born to mothers with an opiate dependence, with > 80% follow up and using random or quasi-random allocation to opiate or control. Control could include an opiate, sedative or non-pharmacological treatment.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Each author assessed study quality and extracted data independently. Primary outcomes included control of symptoms, seizure occurrence, mortality and neurodevelopment. Treatment effect was expressed using relative risk (RR), risk difference (RD), mean difference (MD) and weighted mean difference (WMD). Meta-analysis was performed using a fixed effect model.

MAIN RESULTS

Seven studies enrolling a total of 585 infants met inclusion criteria (Carin 1983; Finnegan 1984; Jackson 2004; Kaltenbach 1986; Kandall 1983; Khoo 1995; Madden 1977); however, two (Finnegan 1984; Kaltenbach 1986) may be sequential reports that include some identical patients. The studies enrolled infants of mothers who had used opiates with or without other drugs during pregnancy. Methodological concerns included the use of quasi-random rather than random patient allocation methods in three studies; sizeable, largely unexplained differences in reported numbers allocated to each group in four studies; and imbalances in group characteristics after randomisation in one study. Opiate (morphine) vs supportive care only: One study (Khoo 1995) found no significant effect on treatment failure (RR 1.29, 95% CI 0.41, 4.07), a significant increase in hospital stay (MD 15.0 days, 95% CI 8.9, 21.1) and significant reductions in time to regain birthweight (MD -2.8 days, 95% -5.3, -0.3) and duration of supportive care (MD -197.2 minutes/day, 95% CI -274.2, -120.3). Opiate vs phenobarbitone: Meta-analysis of four studies found no significant difference in treatment failure (typical RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.51, 1.11). One of these studies (Finnegan 1984) reported that opiate treatment resulted in a significant reduction in treatment failure among infants of mothers who had used only opiates; however, as this was a post-hoc analysis, this result should be interpreted with caution. One study (Jackson 2004) reported a significant reduction in duration of treatment and admission to the nursery for infants receiving morphine compared to phenobarbitone. One study (Kandall 1983) reported a reduction in seizures, of borderline statistical significance, with the use of opiate. Opiate vs diazepam: Meta-analysis of two studies found a significant reduction in treatment failure (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.23, 0.80) with the use of opiate. No study reported neurodevelopment by allocated treatment group.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Opiates, as compared to supportive care only, appear to reduce the time to regain birth weight and reduce the duration of supportive care, but increase the duration of hospital stay; there is no evidence of effect on treatment failure. When compared to phenobarbitone, opiates may reduce the incidence of seizures but, overall, there is no evidence of effect on treatment failure. One study reported a reduction in duration of treatment and nursery admission for infants on morphine. When compared to diazepam, opiates reduce the incidence of treatment failure. A post-hoc analysis generates the hypothesis that treatment effects may vary according to whether the population includes infants born to all opiate users (i.e. with or without other drug exposure) or is restricted to infants of mothers who used opiates only. In view of the methodologic limitations of the included studies the conclusions of this review should be treated with caution.

Therapy of the neonatal abstinence syndrome with tincture of opium or morphine drops

BACKGROUND

Treating opioid-addicted women with methadone in pregnancy increased the number of newborns suffering from neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS). High-pitch crying, insomnia, tremor, myoclonic jerks, vomiting, diarrhoea and poor weight gain were reported symptoms, which were evaluated using the Finnegan (F)-score. Earlier phenobarbital or paregoric had been used to suppress symptoms. We surveyed the administration of pure mu-agonist morphine (MO) in comparison to the alcoholic opioid mixture in tincture of opium (TO). Thirty-three newborns were included in the survey, after informed consent by their parents.

RESULTS

NAS started 3-5 days after delivery and lasted for 27 or 30 days (mean) in the TO and MO groups, respectively. In either of the tested parameters, we found no significant differences between the two groups (2P < 0.05). The maximum F-score was similar in both groups, but the dose to suppress NAS was higher in the MO group (0.6-0.5 mg/day; total dose 61.6-42.7 mg of morphine). The duration of the therapy was longer in the MO than in the TO group (37.5-32.4 days). On the other hand the weight gain was better in the MO group than in the TO group (25-19 g/day), but was reduced in both groups compared with healthy newborns.

CONCLUSIONS

Morphine is suitable to treat NAS in a similar manner as tincture of opium, but avoids unwanted effects of the alcoholic extracts with various alkaloids in the tincture of opium and allows better weight gain of the newborns.

Traitement par le diazépam du syndrome de sevrage néonatal aux opiacés (23 cas)

INTRODUCTION

The fetal opiate exposure presents many risks for the newborn. One of the most important is the neonatal abstinence syndrome that associates neurological and digestive signs. In some cases the vital prognosis can be involved. The evaluation of the syndrome's severity is based on certificated scales. The mortality has been reduced by the improved management of these neonates. Diamorphine, phenobarbital, chlorpromazine and diazepam are the most currently used. However, there is no consensus on the treatment. The data concerning the treatment are controversial, especially for the use of diazepam. The aim of our study was to describe the effects of diazepam obtained in three different centers and to compare our results to those of the literature.

POPULATION AND METHODS

Twenty-three neonates were included. They were all hospitalized for abstinence syndrome and treated by diazepam. The Finnegan scale was used to evaluate the symptom's severity and the effects of the diazepam. The principal evaluation criteria were the duration of treatment and hospitalization, the timing in recovery of birth weight and the percentage of birth weight loss.

RESULTS

The average treatment duration was 7 days, the average hospitalization duration was 18 days, the birth weight was recovered at 10 days of life and the percentage of loss of birth weight was 6.5%. Diazepam treatment failed in only one case. No case of intense dehydration occurred.

CONCLUSION

Due to the retrospective design of the study, the diazepam could not be compared to other drugs. Nevertheless, it argues against the "anti-diazepam" attitude. A controlled randomised prospective study is needed to evaluated the optimal therapeutic strategy.

A randomised controlled trial of morphine versus phenobarbitone for neonatal abstinence syndrome

BACKGROUND

The incidence of neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS) has increased 10-fold over the last decade in Glasgow. In the Princess Royal Maternity Hospital, it now accounts for 17% of special care baby unit (SCBU) admissions.

OBJECTIVE

To compare opiate replacement therapy (morphine sulphate) with the present standard treatment (phenobarbitone) for management of NAS. The primary study end point was duration of pharmaceutical treatment. Secondary end points were the requirement for additional drugs and the requirement for SCBU admission.

DESIGN

Double blind, randomised controlled clinical trial.

METHODS

Differential diagnoses were excluded, and two consecutive Lipsitz scores > 4 defined NAS requiring treatment. Infants were randomised to receive morphine sulphate or phenobarbitone. Treatments were identical in appearance, odour, and volume. Increments, decrements, and discontinuation of treatments were protocol driven.

RESULTS

Seventy five infants participated. All mothers received opiate replacement therapy (methadone) during pregnancy and most used other drugs (n = 62, 83%). No significant difference in maternal drug use patterns was observed between treatment groups. Median treatment duration was four days shorter with opiate replacement (8 v 12 days, Mann-Whitney U test, p = 0.02). Phenobarbitone treated infants tended to require second line treatment (47% v 35%, chi(2) test, p = 0.11) and SCBU admission (62% v 30%, chi(2) test, p = 0.04) more often.

CONCLUSIONS

Opiate replacement therapy appears to be superior for management of symptomatic NAS when maternal opiate use is prevalent. The shorter treatment duration and lower requirement for higher intensity nursing may have significant cost implications. Tailoring NAS treatment to local maternal drug use may result in similar benefits.

[Management of the opioid withdrawal in the neonates: French and European survey]

Maternal opioid abuse during pregnancy results in 60 to 95% of neonatal withdrawal. The literature review on the evaluation of the severity of the related symptoms and treatments used shows an absence of consensus.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

To survey the management of the neonatal withdrawal a questionnaire was sent to French and other European pharmacists.

RESULTS

Fifty-eight questionnaires were returned, 37 from France. In 74%, a written protocol about the management of the neonatal withdrawal was available. The severity of the symptoms was assessed using the Finnegan's scale in 55% of the cases and the treatment was a substitute opiate in 72.5%. In 64% of the cases, this drug was an oral morphine solution: a hydrochloride solution in France and a sulfate solution in other E.U countries at the most common dose of 0.5 to 1mg x kg(-1) x d(-1) and 0.24 mg x kg(-1) x d(-1) respectively.

DISCUSSION

The solution used in France is contra-indicated in infants less than six months and the presentation is not adapted to this use.

CONCLUSION

This morphine survey points out that a preparation intended for infants should be developed and licensed in this indication to improve the use of treatment.

Treatment of neonatal abstinence syndrome

Neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS) is suffered by infants withdrawing from substances on which they have become physically dependent after in utero exposure. They may require prolonged treatment and spend weeks or even months in hospital. A wide range of drugs have been used to treat NAS. The efficacy of few, however, have been adequately investigated. Evidence suggests that opioids are the most appropriate, at least in infants exposed to diamorphine or methadone. In all "head to head" trials, diazepam has been shown to be ineffective. Morphine and methadone are currently the most commonly prescribed opioids to treat NAS, but randomised trials have not been undertaken to determine which is the more beneficial. Many infants with NAS have been exposed to multiple substances in utero. Further research is required into whether a single opiate or a multiple drug regimen is the best option for such patients.

Sedatives for opiate withdrawal in newborn infants

BACKGROUND

Neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS) due to opiate withdrawal may result in disruption of the mother-infant relationship, sleep-wake abnormalities, feeding difficulties, weight loss and seizures. Treatments used to ameliorate symptoms and reduce morbidity include opiates, sedatives and non-pharmacological treatments.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness and safety of using a sedative compared to a non-opiate control for NAS due to withdrawal from opiates, and to determine which type of sedative is most effective and safe.

SEARCH STRATEGY

The standard search strategy of the Neonatal Review Group was used. This included searches of the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (The Cochrane Library, Issue 1, 2002) and MEDLINE 1966-2002.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Trials enrolling infants with NAS born to mothers with an opiate dependence, with > 80% follow up and using random or quasi-random allocation to sedative or control. Control could include another sedative or non-pharmacological treatment.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Each author assessed study quality and extracted data independently. Primary outcomes included treatment failure (failure to achieve symptom control or use of additional drug treatment), seizure occurrence, mortality and neurodevelopment. Treatment effect was expressed using (RR), risk difference (RD), mean difference (MD) and weighted mean difference (WMD). Meta-analysis was performed using a fixed effect model.

MAIN RESULTS

Five studies enrolling a total of 285 patients met inclusion criteria (Finnegan 1984, Kahn 1969, Kaltenbach 1986, Khoo 1995, Madden 1977); however, two (Finnegan 1984, Kaltenbach 1986) may be sequential reports that include some identical patients. Methodological concerns included the use of quasi-random rather than random patient allocation methods in three studies, and sizeable, largely unexplained differences in reported numbers allocated to each group in three studies. Phenobarbital compared to supportive care alone has not been shown to reduce treatment failure or time to regain birthweight (one study). However, the duration of supportive care required to be given to infants each day was significantly reduced (MD -162.1 minutes/day, 95% CI -249.2, -75.1). Comparing phenobarbital to diazepam, meta-analysis of two studies found that phenobarbital produced a significant reduction in treatment failure (typical RR 0.39, 95% CI 0.24, 0.62). There was no significant difference in duration of treatment or duration of hospital stay. Comparing phenobarbital with chlorpromazine, one study found no significant difference in treatment failure rate. No data for neurodevelopment were available, reported by treatment group as allocated. No trials were eligible that assessed clonidine for NAS.

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

In newborn infants with NAS, there is no evidence that phenobarbital, compared with supportive care alone, reduces treatment failure; however, phenobarbital may reduce the daily duration of supportive care needed. Phenobarbital, compared to diazepam, reduces treatment failure. There is insufficient evidence to support the use of chlorpromazine or clonidine in newborn infants with NAS. Clonidine and chlorpromazine should only be used in the context of a randomised clinical trial. The results of this review, taken in conjunction with the related review, Opiate treatment for opiate withdrawal in newborn infants (Osborn 2002), indicate that treatment with opiates is the preferred initial therapy for NAS. It is hypothesised that this is particularly true for infants whose mothers have used only opiates during pregnancy. If a sedative is used, phenobarbital is preferred to diazepam. The results of an ongoing trial of the addition of phenobarbital to an opiate are awaited.

Opiate treatment for opiate withdrawal in newborn infants

BACKGROUND

Neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS) due to opiate withdrawal may result in disruption of the mother-infant relationship, sleep-wake abnormalities, feeding difficulties, weight loss and seizures. Treatments used to ameliorate symptoms and reduce morbidity include opiates, sedatives and non-pharmacological treatments.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness and safety of using an opiate, compared to a sedative or non-pharmacological treatment, for treatment of NAS due to withdrawal from opiates. The evidence for use of different opiates was assessed in subgroup analyses.

SEARCH STRATEGY

The standard search strategy of the Cochrane Neonatal Review Group including searches (up to March 2002) of the Oxford Database of Perinatal Trials, Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (The Cochrane Library, Issue 1, 2002), MEDLINE (1966-March 2002), previous reviews including cross references, abstracts, conferences and symposia proceedings, expert informants, journal handsearching mainly in the English language.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Trials enrolling infants with NAS born to mothers with an opiate dependence, with > 80% follow up and using random or quasi-random allocation to opiate or control. Control could include an opiate, sedative or non-pharmacological treatment.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Each author assessed study quality and extracted data independently. Primary outcomes included control of symptoms, seizure occurrence, mortality and neurodevelopment. Treatment effect was expressed using relative risk (RR), risk difference (RD), mean difference (MD) and weighted mean difference (WMD). Meta-analysis was performed using a fixed effect model.

MAIN RESULTS

Six studies enrolling a total of 511 infants met inclusion criteria (Carin 1983, Finnegan 1984, Kaltenbach 1986, Kandall 1983, Khoo 1995, Madden 1977); however, two (Finnegan 1984, Kaltenbach 1986) may be sequential reports that include some identical patients. The studies enrolled infants of mothers who had used opiates with or without other drugs during pregnancy. Methodological concerns included the use of quasi-random rather than random patient allocation methods in three studies, and sizeable, largely unexplained differences in reported numbers allocated to each group in four studies. Opiate (morphine) vs supportive care only: One study (Khoo 1995) found no significant effect on treatment failure (RR 1.29, 95% CI 0.41, 4.07), a significant increase in hospital stay (MD 15.0 days, 95% CI 8.9, 21.1) and significant reductions in time to regain birthweight (MD -2.8 days, 95% -5.3, -0.3) and duration of supportive care (MD -197.2 minutes/day, 95% CI -274.2, -120.3). Opiate vs phenobarbital: Meta-analysis of three studies found no significant difference in treatment failure (typical RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.46, 1.32). One of these studies (Finnegan 1984) reported that opiate treatment resulted in a significant reduction in treatment failure among infants of mothers who had used only opiates; however, as this was a post-hoc analysis, this result should be interpreted with caution. One study (Kandall 1983) reported a reduction in seizures, of borderline statistical significance, with the use of opiate. Opiate vs diazepam: Meta-analysis of two studies found a significant reduction in treatment failure (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.23, 0.80) with the use of opiate. No study reported neurodevelopment by allocated treatment group.

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

Opiates, as compared to supportive care only, appear to reduce the time to regain birth weight and reduce the duration of supportive care, but increase the duration of hospital stay; there is no evidence of effect on treatment failure. When compared to phenobarbital, opiates may reduce the incidence of seizures but, overall, there is no evidence of effect on treatment failure. When compared to diazepam, opiates reduce the incidence of treatment failure. A post-hoc analysis generates the hypothesis that treatment effects may vary according to whether the population includes infants born to all opiate users (i.e. with or without other drug exposure) or is restricted to infants of mothers who used opiates only. In view of the methodologic limitations of the included studies the conclusions of this review should be treated with caution. Further research is needed.

Acute neurologic complications of drug and alcohol abuse

Recreationally abused substances include both legal and illegal agents, broadly classified as opioids, psychostimulants, sedatives, cannabis (marijuana), hallucinogens, inhalants, dissociative anesthetics (phencyclidine), anticholinergics, ethanol, and tobacco. These substances are associated with an array of neurological emergencies resulting from overdose, withdrawal, and other medical and neurological complications.