Acute hemodynamic effects of methylxanthine therapy in preterm neonates: Effect of variations in subgroups

Methylxanthine for the prevention and treatment of apnea in preterm infants

BACKGROUND

Very preterm infants often require respiratory support and are therefore exposed to an increased risk of chronic lung disease and later neurodevelopmental disability. Although methylxanthines are widely used to prevent and treat apnea associated with prematurity and to facilitate extubation, there is uncertainty about the benefits and harms of different types of methylxanthines.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of methylxanthines on the incidence of apnea, death, neurodevelopmental disability, and other longer-term outcomes in preterm infants (1) at risk for or with apnea, or (2) undergoing extubation.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, two other databases, and three trial registers (November 2022).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized trials in preterm infants, in which methylxanthines (aminophylline, caffeine, or theophylline) were compared to placebo or no treatment for any indication (i.e. prevention of apnea, treatment of apnea, or prevention of re-intubation).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methods and GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 18 studies (2705 infants), evaluating the use of methylxanthine in preterm infants for: any indication (one study); prevention of apnea (six studies); treatment of apnea (five studies); and to prevent re-intubation (six studies). Death or major neurodevelopmental disability (DMND) at 18 to 24 months. Only the Caffeine for Apnea of Prematurity (CAP) study (enrolling 2006 infants) reported on this outcome. Overall, caffeine probably reduced the risk of DMND in preterm infants treated with caffeine for any indication (risk ratio (RR) 0.87, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.78 to 0.97; risk difference (RD) -0.06, 95% CI -0.10 to -0.02; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 16, 95% CI 10 to 50; 1 study, 1869 infants; moderate-certainty evidence). No other trials reported DMND. Results from the CAP trial regarding DMND at 18 to 24 months are less precise when analyzed based on treatment indication. Caffeine probably results in little or no difference in DMND in infants treated for prevention of apnea (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.24; RD -0.00, 95% CI -0.10 to 0.09; 1 study, 423 infants; moderate-certainty evidence) and probably results in a slight reduction in DMND in infants treated for apnea of prematurity (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.01; RD -0.06, 95% CI -0.13 to 0.00; NNTB 16, 95% CI 7 to > 1000; 1 study, 767 infants; moderate-certainty evidence) or to prevent re-intubation (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.73 to 0.99; RD -0.08, 95% CI -0.15 to -0.00; NNTB 12, 95% CI 6 to >1000; 1 study, 676 infants; moderate-certainty evidence). Death. In the overall analysis of any methylxanthine treatment for any indication, methylxanthine used for any indication probably results in little or no difference in death at hospital discharge (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.37; I2 = 0%; RD -0.00, 95% CI -0.02 to 0.02; I2 = 5%; 7 studies, 2289 infants; moderate-certainty evidence). Major neurodevelopmental disability at 18 to 24 months. In the CAP trial, caffeine probably reduced the risk of major neurodevelopmental disability at 18 to 24 months (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.76 to 0.96; RD -0.06, 95% CI -0.10 to -0.02; NNTB 16, 95% CI 10 to 50; 1 study, 1869 infants; moderate-certainty evidence), including a reduction in the risk of cerebral palsy or gross motor disability (RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.88; RD -0.03, 95% CI -0.05 to -0.01; NNTB 33, 95% CI 20 to 100; 1 study, 1810 infants; moderate-certainty evidence) and a marginal reduction in the risk of developmental delay (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.00; RD -0.05, 95% CI -0.09 to -0.00; NNTB 20, 95% CI 11 to > 1000; 1 study, 1725 infants; moderate-certainty evidence). Any apneic episodes, failed apnea reduction after two to seven days (< 50% reduction in apnea) (for infants treated with apnea), and need for positive-pressure ventilation after institution of treatment. Methylxanthine used for any indication probably reduces the occurrence of any apneic episodes (RR 0.31, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.52; I2 = 47%; RD -0.38, 95% CI -0.51 to -0.25; I2 = 49%; NNTB 3, 95% CI 2 to 4; 4 studies, 167 infants; moderate-certainty evidence), failed apnea reduction after two to seven days (RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.70; I2 = 0%; RD -0.31, 95% CI -0.44 to -0.17; I2 = 53%; NNTB 3, 95% CI 2 to 6; 4 studies, 174 infants; moderate-certainty evidence), and may reduce receipt of positive-pressure ventilation after institution of treatment (RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.96; I2 = 0%; RD -0.06, 95% CI -0.11 to -0.01; I2 = 49%; NNTB 16, 95% CI 9 to 100; 9 studies, 373 infants; low-certainty evidence). Chronic lung disease. Methylxanthine used for any indication reduces chronic lung disease (defined as the use of supplemental oxygen at 36 weeks' postmenstrual age) (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.69 to 0.85; I2 = 0%; RD -0.10, 95% CI -0.14 to -0.06; I2 = 18%; NNTB 10, 95% CI 7 to 16; 4 studies, 2142 infants; high-certainty evidence). Failure to extubate or the need for re-intubation within one week after initiation of therapy. Methylxanthine used for the prevention of re-intubation probably results in a large reduction in failed extubation compared with no treatment (RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.71; I2 = 0%; RD -0.27, 95% CI -0.39 to -0.15; I2 = 69%; NNTB 4, 95% CI 2 to 6; 6 studies, 197 infants; moderate-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Caffeine probably reduces the risk of death, major neurodevelopmental disability at 18 to 24 months, and the composite outcome DMND at 18 to 24 months. Administration of any methylxanthine to preterm infants for any indication probably leads to a reduction in the risk of any apneic episodes, failed apnea reduction after two to seven days, cerebral palsy, developmental delay, and may reduce receipt of positive-pressure ventilation after institution of treatment. Methylxanthine used for any indication reduces chronic lung disease (defined as the use of supplemental oxygen at 36 weeks' postmenstrual age).

Caffeine versus other methylxanthines for the prevention and treatment of apnea in preterm infants

BACKGROUND

Methylxanthines, including caffeine, theophylline, and aminophylline, work as stimulants of the respiratory drive, and decrease apnea of prematurity, a developmental disorder common in preterm infants. In particular, caffeine has been reported to improve important clinical outcomes, including bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD) and neurodevelopmental disability. However, there is uncertainty regarding the efficacy of caffeine compared to other methylxanthines.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of caffeine compared to aminophylline or theophylline in preterm infants at risk of apnea, with apnea, or in the peri-extubation phase.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, Epistemonikos, the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), and clinicaltrials.gov in February 2023. We also checked the reference lists of relevant articles to identify additional studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Studies: randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs Participants: infants born before 34 weeks of gestation for prevention and extubation trials, and infants born before 37 weeks of gestation for treatment trials Intervention and comparison: caffeine versus theophylline or caffeine versus aminophylline. We included all doses and duration of treatment.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. We evaluated treatment effects using a fixed-effect model with risk ratio (RR), risk difference (RD), and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for categorical data, and mean, standard deviation, and mean difference for continuous data. We used the GRADE approach to evaluate the certainty of evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 22 trials enrolling 1776 preterm infants. The indication for treatment was prevention of apnea in three studies, treatment of apnea in 13 studies, and extubation management in three studies. In three studies, there were multiple indications for treatment, and in one study, the indication for treatment was unclear. In 19 included studies, the infants had a mean gestational age between 28 and 32 weeks and a mean birth weight between 1000 g and 1500 g. One study's participants had a mean gestational age of more than 32 weeks, and two studies had participants with a mean birth weight of 1500 g or more. Caffeine administrated for any indication may result in little to no difference in all-cause mortality prior to hospital discharge compared to other methylxanthines (RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.84; RD 0.02, 95% CI -0.05 to 0.08; 2 studies, 396 infants; low-certainty evidence). Only one study enrolling 79 infants reported components of the outcome moderate to severe neurodevelopmental disability at 18 to 26 months. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of caffeine on cognitive developmental delay compared to other methylxanthines (RR 0.17, 95% CI 0.02 to 1.37; RD -0.12, 95% CI -0.24 to 0.01; 1 study, 79 infants; very low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of caffeine on language developmental delay compared to other methylxanthines (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.58; RD -0.07, 95% CI -0.27 to 0.12; 1 study, 79 infants; very low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of caffeine on motor developmental delay compared to other methylxanthines (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.13 to 1.96; RD -0.07, 95% CI -0.21 to 0.07; 1 study, 79 infants; very low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of caffeine on visual and hearing impairment compared to other methylxanthines. At 24 months of age, visual impairment was seen in 8 out of 11 infants and 10 out of 11 infants in the caffeine and other methylxanthines groups, respectively. Hearing impairment was seen in 2 out of 5 infants and 1 out of 1 infant in the caffeine and other methylxanthines groups, respectively. No studies reported the outcomes cerebral palsy, gross motor disability, and mental development. Compared to other methylxanthines, caffeine may result in little to no difference in BPD/chronic lung disease, defined as 28 days of oxygen exposure at 36 weeks' postmenstrual age (RR 1.40, 95% CI 0.92 to 2.11; RD 0.04, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.09; 3 studies, 481 infants; low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of caffeine on side effects (tachycardia, agitation, or feed intolerance) leading to a reduction in dose or withholding of methylxanthines compared to other methylxanthines (RR 0.17, 95% CI 0.02 to 1.32; RD -0.29, 95% CI -0.57 to -0.02; 1 study, 30 infants; very low-certainty evidence). Caffeine may result in little to no difference in duration of hospital stay compared to other methylxanthines (median (interquartile range): caffeine 43 days (27.5 to 61.5); other methylxanthines 39 days (28 to 55)). No studies reported the outcome seizures.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Although caffeine has been shown to improve important clinical outcomes, in the few studies that compared caffeine to other methylxanthines, there might be little to no difference in mortality, bronchopulmonary dysplasia, and duration of hospital stay. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of caffeine compared to other methylxanthines on long-term development and side effects. Although caffeine or other methylxanthines are widely used in preterm infants, there is little direct evidence to support the choice of which methylxanthine to use. More research is needed, especially on extremely preterm infants born before 28 weeks of gestation. Data from four ongoing studies might provide more evidence on the effects of caffeine or other methylxanthines.

Caffeine versus other methylxanthines for the prevention and treatment of apnea in preterm infants

This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (intervention). The objectives are as follows:

To assess the effects of caffeine compared to aminophylline or theophylline in preterm infants at risk of apnea, with apnea, or in the peri‐extubation phase.

Ultrasonography Causes Agitation and Pain Leading to Hemodynamic Disturbance in Neonates: A Prospective Observational Study

BACKGROUND

Ultrasonography is widely used in neonatological practice and studies investigating the hemodynamic effects of various treatment protocols or clinical situations. On the other hand, pain causes changes in the cardiovascular system; so, in the case of ultrasonography leading to pain in neonates, it may cause hemodynamic alterations. In this prospective study, we evaluate whether ultrasonographic application causes pain and changes in the hemodynamic system.

METHODS

Newborns undergoing ultrasonographic examination were enrolled in the study. Vital signs, cerebral and mesenteric tissue oxygenation (StO₂) levels, and middle cerebral artery (MCA) Doppler measurements were recorded, and NPASS scores were calculated before and after ultrasonography.

RESULTS

We enrolled 39 patients in the study. After ultrasonography, Neonatal Pain, Agitation, and Sedation Scale (NPASS) scores were significantly higher (p < 0.01), and all vital signs (heart rate, respiratory rate, SpO₂, diastolic and systolic blood pressure; p = 0.03; p < 0.01, p < 0.01, p < 0.01, p = 0.02, p = 0.03, respectively) were altered. Cerebral (p = 0.008) and mesenteric (p = 0.039) StO₂ levels were significantly lower in the whole study group, MCA end-diastolic velocity decreased (p = 0.02), and the resistive index (p = 0.03) increased in patients whose NPASS score was >7 after ultrasonography.

CONCLUSIONS

This study is the first to show that ultrasonography may cause pain in newborn patients, and alters vital signs and hemodynamic parameters. Therefore, precautions should be taken to protect newborn babies from pain during ultrasound applications, as they are already exposed to many noxious stimuli. Furthermore, pain scores should be considered in studies using ultrasonography and evaluating hemodynamic parameters to increase the reliability of the studies.

Precision caffeine therapy for apnea of prematurity and circadian rhythms: New possibilities open up

Caffeine is the globally consumed psychoactive substance and the drug of choice for the treatment of apnea of prematurity (AOP), but its therapeutic effects are highly variable among preterm infants. Many of the molecular underpinnings of the marked individual response have remained elusive yet. Interestingly, the significant association between Clock gene polymorphisms and the response to caffeine therapy offers an opportunity to advance our understanding of potential mechanistic pathways. In this review, we delineate the functions and mechanisms of human circadian rhythms. An up-to-date advance of the formation and ontogeny of human circadian rhythms during the perinatal period are concisely discussed. Specially, we summarize and discuss the characteristics of circadian rhythms in preterm infants. Second, we discuss the role of caffeine consumption on the circadian rhythms in animal models and human, especially in neonates and preterm infants. Finally, we postulate how circadian-based therapeutic initiatives could open new possibilities to promote precision caffeine therapy for the AOP management in preterm infants.

The Gut Microbiome of Preterm Infants Treated With Aminophylline Is Closely Related to the Occurrence of Feeding Intolerance and the Weight Gain

Background

Aminophylline is widely used in the treatment of preterm infants, but it can cause feeding intolerance events, in which gut microbial dysbiosis may have a role. This study aims to investigate the relationship between the gut microbiome of preterm infants treated with aminophylline and the occurrence of feeding intolerance and weight gain rate.

Methods

This study included a cohort of 118 preterm infants. Survival analysis and multivariate Cox regression were used to evaluate the relationship between aminophylline treatment and the occurrence of feeding intolerance. 16S rRNA V4 region gene sequencing was used to characterize the microbiome of fecal samples from the cohort. Linear discriminant analysis effect size was used to analyze the differential abundance of bacteria related to aminophylline treatment. Wilcoxon test, Kruskal–Wallis test, Spearman correlation coefficients and generalized linear mixed models were used to analyze the correlation between the differential bacteria and feeding intolerance events as well as the weight gain.

Results

The results showed that the use of aminophylline could significantly increase the occurrence of feeding intolerance. The relative abundances of Streptococcus and Rothia in the gut microbiome of preterm infants were positively correlated with both the occurrence of feeding intolerance and the use of aminophylline, while the relative abundance of Staphylococcus was negatively correlated. In particular, preterm infants with a lower relative abundance of Rothia were more likely to develop feeding intolerance associated with aminophylline, and this difference existed before the onset of feeding intolerance. Moreover, it took longer for individuals with a lower relative abundance of Streptococcus to reach 2 kg weight. The contribution of Streptococcus to weight gain was greater than that of Bifidobacterium or Lactobacillus.

Conclusion

The gut microbiome in preterm infants treated with aminophylline was characterized by a decrease in Streptococcus and Rothia and an increase in Staphylococcus. These microbes, especially Rothia, were positively correlated with the occurrence of feeding intolerance. Streptococcus but not Bifidobacter likely participated in the weight gain of preterm infants in early life.

Treating Apnea of Prematurity

Premature babies often suffer apnea of prematurity as a physiological consequence of an immature respiratory system. Hypercapnia may develop, and neonates with apnea of prematurity are at an increased risk of morbidity and mortality. The long-term effects of apnea of prematurity or their treatments are less clear. While a number of treatment options exist for apnea of prematurity, there is no clear-cut “first-line” approach or gold standard of care. Effective treatments, such as caffeine citrate, carbon dioxide inhalation, nasal continuous positive airway pressure, nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation, and others, may be associated with safety concerns. More conservative treatments are available, such as kangaroo care, postural changes, and sensory stimulation, but they may not be effective. While apnea of prematurity resolves spontaneously as the respiratory system matures, it can complicate neonatal care and may have both short-term and long-term consequences. The role, if any, that apnea of prematurity may play in mortality of preterm neonates is not clear.

The limited management options for apnoea of prematurity

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE

About 10% of all infants are born prematurely. Almost all of those of gestational age less than about 30 weeks, and about half of those of gestational age up to about 35 weeks, are subject to unpredictable interruptions of breathing-known as "apnoea of prematurity" (AOP). We present a synopsis of the problem and point out the limited management options.

COMMENT

A basal rate for spontaneous breathing is normally maintained by integrated action of generator cells in the brainstem and feedback from central and peripheral chemosensors. In AOP, there are intermittent periods (seconds) lacking spontaneous firing, which results in hypoxia and hypercapnia. The long-term consequences of these interruptions in oxygen supply to tissues are not known. Although many treatment modalities are used, including drug therapy, nonpharmacologic care and mechanical intervention, there is no universally effective first-line management for AOP. Caffeine citrate is generally the most frequently used pharmacotherapeutic agent, but its side effect profile narrows with higher doses and the upper limit is still being investigated to discern the greatest benefit-to-risk ratio; thus, most infants do not achieve complete resolution of apnoeas.

WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION

Given the widespread and serious nature of the problem of AOP, there is a surprising lack of treatment options. A more consistent and effective treatment, alone or as adjunct, would be welcome.