Sedatives for opiate withdrawal in newborn infants

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.

Use of Phenobarbital to Treat Neonatal Abstinence Syndrome From Exposure to Single vs. Multiple Substances

Drug use in pregnancy is a major public health issue. Intrauterine exposure to opioids alone or in addition to other substances may lead to neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS). Little consensus exists on optimal therapy, especially for those exposed to multiple drugs. We aim to determine whether the use of opioids alone vs. in combination with phenobarbital will affect short-term neonatal outcomes. This retrospective review of infants admitted to the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) included newborns ≥35 weeks of gestation exposed to opioids, or multiple substances including opioids, in utero. Treatment with opioids alone, and addition of phenobarbital as initial therapy vs. rescue, was evaluated. Out of 182 newborns, 54 (30%) were exposed to methadone alone vs. 128 (70%) to multiple drugs. Length of stay (LOS) in the hospital was not significantly affected (p = 0.684) by single vs. multiple drug exposure in utero. Treatment of NAS with opioid alone resulted in significantly shorter LOS (27 days), as compared to those treated with opioid and phenobarbital (45 days, p < 0.001). LOS was further prolonged in those treated with phenobarbital as a "rescue" medication in addition to an opioid (49 days, p < 0.0001). There was a significant increase in LOS and duration of opioid treatment for all infants treated with phenobarbital, both in those exposed to opioids alone, and to multiple substances in utero.

Non-pharmacological care for opioid withdrawal in newborns

BACKGROUND

The prevalence of substance use, both prescribed and non-prescribed, is increasing in many areas of the world. Substance use by women of childbearing age contributes to increasing rates of neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS). Neonatal opioid withdrawal syndrome (NOWS) is a newer term describing the subset of NAS related to opioid exposure. Non-pharmacological care is the first-line treatment for substance withdrawal in newborns. Despite the widespread use of non-pharmacological care to mitigate symptoms of NAS, there is not an established definition of, and standard for, non-pharmacological care practices in this population. Evaluation of safety and efficacy of non-pharmacological practices could provide clear guidance for clinical practice.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the safety and efficacy of non-pharmacological treatment of infants at risk for, or having symptoms consistent with, opioid withdrawal on the length of hospitalization and use of pharmacological treatment for symptom management. Comparison 1: in infants at risk for, or having early symptoms consistent with, opioid withdrawal, does non-pharmacological treatment reduce the length of hospitalization and use of pharmacological treatment? Comparison 2: in infants receiving pharmacological treatment for symptoms consistent with opioid withdrawal, does concurrent non-pharmacological treatment reduce duration of pharmacological treatment, maximum and cumulative doses of opioid medication, and length of hospitalization?

SEARCH METHODS

We used the standard search strategy of Cochrane Neonatal to search CENTRAL (2019, Issue 10); Ovid MEDLINE; and CINAHL on 11 October 2019. We also searched clinical trials databases and the reference lists of retrieved articles for randomized controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs, and cluster trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included trials comparing single or bundled non-pharmacological interventions to no non-pharmacological treatment or different single or bundled non-pharmacological interventions. We assessed non-pharmacological interventions independently and in combination based on sufficient similarity in population, intervention, and comparison groups studied. We categorized non-pharmacological interventions as: modifying environmental stimulation, feeding practices, and support of the mother-infant dyad. We presented non-randomized studies identified in the search process narratively.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. We used the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of evidence. Primary outcomes in infants at risk for, or having early symptoms consistent with, opioid withdrawal included length of hospitalization and pharmacological treatment with one or more doses of opioid or sedative medication. Primary outcomes in infants receiving opioid treatment for symptoms consistent with opioid withdrawal included length of hospitalization, length of pharmacological treatment with opioid or sedative medication, and maximum and cumulative doses of opioid medication.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified six RCTs (353 infants) in which infants at risk for, or having symptoms consistent with, opioid withdrawal participated between 1975 and 2018. We identified no RCTs in which infants receiving opioid treatment for symptoms consistent with opioid withdrawal participated. The certainty of evidence for all outcomes was very low to low. We also identified and excluded 34 non-randomized studies published between 2005 and 2018, including 29 in which infants at risk for, or having symptoms consistent with, opioid withdrawal participated and five in which infants receiving opioid treatment for symptoms consistent with opioid withdrawal participated. We identified seven preregistered interventional clinical trials that may qualify for inclusion at review update when complete. Of the six RCTs, four studies assessed modifying environmental stimulation in the form of a mechanical rocking bed, prone positioning, non-oscillating waterbed, or a low-stimulation nursery; one study assessed feeding practices (comparing 24 kcal/oz to 20 kcal/oz formula); and one study assessed support of the maternal-infant dyad (tailored breastfeeding support). There was no evidence of a difference in length of hospitalization in the one study that assessed modifying environmental stimulation (mean difference [MD) -1 day, 95% confidence interval [CI) -2.82 to 0.82; 30 infants; very low-certainty evidence) and the one study of support of the maternal-infant dyad (MD -8.9 days, 95% CI -19.84 to 2.04; 14 infants; very low-certainty evidence). No studies of feeding practices evaluated the length of hospitalization. There was no evidence of a difference in use of pharmacological treatment in three studies of modifying environmental stimulation (typical risk ratio [RR) 1.00, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.16; 92 infants; low-certainty evidence), one study of feeding practices (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.33; 49 infants; very low-certainty evidence), and one study of support of the maternal-infant dyad (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.13 to 1.90; 14 infants; very low-certainty evidence). Reported secondary outcomes included neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) admission, days to regain birth weight, and weight nadir. One study of support of the maternal-infant dyad reported NICU admission (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.13 to 1.90; 14 infants; very low-certainty evidence). One study of feeding practices reported days to regain birth weight (MD 1.10 days, 95% CI 2.76 to 0.56; 46 infants; very low-certainty evidence). One study that assessed modifying environmental stimulation reported weight nadir (MD -0.28, 95% CI -1.15 to 0.59; 194 infants; very low-certainty evidence) and one study of feeding practices reported weight nadir (MD -0.8, 95% CI -2.24 to 0.64; 46 infants; very low-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We are uncertain whether non-pharmacological care for opioid withdrawal in newborns affects important clinical outcomes including length of hospitalization and use of pharmacological treatment based on the six included studies. The outcomes identified for this review were of very low- to low-certainty evidence. Combined analysis was limited by heterogeneity in study design and intervention definitions as well as the number of studies. Many prespecified outcomes were not reported. Although caregivers are encouraged by experts to optimize non-pharmacological care for opioid withdrawal in newborns prior to initiating pharmacological care, we do not have sufficient evidence to inform specific clinical practices. Larger well-designed studies are needed to determine the effect of non-pharmacological care for opioid withdrawal in newborns.

Treatment of opioid withdrawal in neonates with morphine, phenobarbital, or chlorpromazine: a randomized double-blind trial

Three suitable compounds (morphine, chlorpromazine, and phenobarbital) to treat neonatal abstinence syndrome were compared in a prospective multicenter, double-blind trial. Neonates exposed to opioids in utero were randomly allocated to one of three treatment groups. When a predefined threshold of a modified Finnegan score was reached, treatment started and increased stepwise until symptoms were controlled. If symptoms could not be controlled with the predefined maximal dose of a single drug, a second drug was added. Among 143 infants recruited, 120 needed pharmacological treatment. Median length of treatment for morphine was 22 days (95% CI 18 to 33), for chlorpromazine 25 days (95% CI 21 to 34), and for phenobarbital 32 days (95% CI 27 to 38) (p = ns). In the morphine group, only 3% of infants (1/33) needed a second drug; in the chlorpromazine group, this proportion was 56% (24/43), and in the phenobarbital group 30% (13/44).Conclusion: None of the drugs tested for treating neonatal abstinence syndrome resulted in a significantly shorter treatment length than the others. As morphine alone was able to control symptoms in almost all infants, it may be preferred to the two other drugs but should still be tested against more potent opioids such as buprenorphine.Trial registration: At ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02810782 (registered retrospectively).What is Known:• Neonates exposed to opiates in utero and presenting with withdrawal symptoms should first be treated by non-pharmacological supportive measures.• In those who fail, drugs have to be given, but there is controversy which drug is best.What is New:• Among three candidates, morphine, chlorpromazine and phenobarbital, none resulted in significantly shorter treatment time.• As morphine alone was able to control symptoms in almost all infants, it may be preferred to the two other drugs.

Comparative effectiveness of opioid replacement agents for neonatal opioid withdrawal syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE(S)

To compare short-term treatment outcomes of opioid pharmacotherapy for neonatal opioid withdrawal syndrome (NOWS).

STUDY DESIGN

PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, and The Cochrane Library were searched from inception through September 30, 2018. Primary outcome was treatment duration (LOT). Secondary outcomes included hospitalization duration (LOS) and rate of adjunct drug needed (RAD).

RESULTS

Of 753 publications, 11 studies met inclusion criteria. There was no difference in LOT (WMD -1.39 [-5.79 to -3.01] days, I² 82%) or LOS (WMD -1.48 [-5.75 to -2.79] days, I² 92%) between morphine and methadone. RAD with morphine was higher (RR 1.51 [1.35-1.69], I² 0%). Buprenorphine was associated with shorter LOT (WMD 7.70 [0.88-14.53] days, I² 76%) and LOS (WMD 5.61 [-0.01 to -11.24] days, I² 60%) compared with morphine, in addition to methadone according to two cohort studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Methadone had superior primary treatment success compared with morphine. Buprenorphine was associated with the shortest overall durations of treatment and hospitalization.

The role of mother-infant bond in neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS) management

The opioid crisis affects pregnant women and their infants. In the past two decades, the number of infants born with neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS) has quadrupled causing the cost of healthcare expenditures to climb sharply. Pharmacological and non-pharmacological approaches are recommended for the management of NAS. Despite the attention NAS has recently received, treatment recommendations are limited to the hospital setting with much less focus on discharge planning. Additionally, the literature on NAS management does not consider research promoting mother-infant attachment. Recently, more emphasis has been placed on taking a holistic approach to NAS management. However, scholarly writings and research in this area are scarce. This article provides a review of current literature on NAS management and attachment-based interventions. Recommendations for practice and future research focused on holistic, non-pharmacological approaches to NAS management are provided.

Pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments for the Neonatal Abstinence Syndrome (NAS)

Neonatal abstinence syndrome is defined by signs and symptoms of withdrawal that infants develop after intrauterine maternal drug exposure. All infants with documented in utero opioid exposure, or a high pre-test probability of exposure should have monitoring with a standard assessment instrument such as a Finnegan Score. A Finnegan score of >8 is suggestive of opioid exposure, even in the absence of declared use during pregnancy. At least half of infants in most locales can be treated without the use of pharmacologic means. For this reason, symptom scores will drive the decision for pharmacologic therapy. Nevertheless, all infants, regardless of initial manifestations, should be first be managed with non-pharmacologic approaches which in turn, should not be considered as the sole alternative to drug therapy, but rather, as the base upon which all patients are treated. Those who continue to have symptoms despite supportive care should be pharmacologically treated, which in the most severe cases, is life-saving.

The opioid epidemic and neonatal abstinence syndrome in the USA: a review of the continuum of care

As the prescription opioid epidemic grew in the USA, its impact extended to pregnant women and their infants. This review summarises how increasing rates of neonatal abstinence syndrome resulted in a need to improve care to pregnant women and opioid-exposed infants. We discuss the variations in care delivery with particular emphasis on screening at-risk mothers, scoring systems for neonatal drug withdrawal, type and duration of pharmacotherapy, and discharge safety.

A core outcome set for neonatal abstinence syndrome: study protocol for a systematic review, parent interviews and a Delphi survey

BACKGROUND

The prevalence of neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS) is increasing globally resulting in an increased incidence of adverse neonatal outcomes and health system costs. Evidence regarding the effectiveness of NAS prevention and management strategies is very weak and further research initiatives are critically needed to support meta-analysis and clinical practice guidelines. In NAS research, the choice of outcomes and the use of valid, responsive and feasible measurement instruments are crucial. There is currently no consensus and evidence-based core outcome set (COS) for NAS.

METHODS/DESIGN

The development of the NAS-COS will include five stages led by an international Multidisciplinary Steering Committee: (1) qualitative interviews with parents/families and a systematic review (SR) to identify items for inclusion in a COS. The SR will also identify participants for the Delphi survey, (2) a three-round Delphi survey to gain expert opinion on the importance of health outcomes influencing NAS management decisions, (3), a consensus meeting to finalize the items and definitions with experts and COS users, (4) feasibility and pilot testing, development of the COS and explanatory document and (5) implementation planning.

DISCUSSION

Since standardized outcome measurement and reporting will improve NAS clinical research consistency, efficacy and impact, this COS will reflect the minimum set of health outcomes which should be measured in trials evaluating interventions for preventing or treating NAS.

Skin conductance in neonates suffering from abstinence syndrome and unexposed newborns

The aims of this study were to compare the skin conductance (SC) of newborns with opiate-induced neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS) to that of unexposed newborns and to evaluate the potential of SC readings to detect distress in the context of NAS objectively. The SC of 12 newborns with NAS and 12 unexposed newborns was measured at nine specific times during their first 6 weeks of life. The number of SC fluctuations per second (NSCF/s), the amplitude of SC fluctuation, and the mean level of SC were recorded and analyzed. The SC of newborns treated for symptoms of NAS differed significantly from the SC of unexposed newborns with regard to the NSCF/s (p = 0.04). With the mean level of SC, we observed an interaction between groups over time (p value for interaction = 0.02). With increasing postnatal age, we observed higher values in all three SC parameters.

CONCLUSION

The NSCF/s and the mean level of SC appear to be suitable to reflect the distress of newborns suffering from NAS. As it is known that the sensitivity of SC increases with the level of stress experienced, its potential to indicate elevated stress levels in infants with NAS should be investigated in future studies evaluating different therapy regimens.

WHAT IS KNOWN

• Skin conductance is a result of the filling of palmar and plantar sweat glands innervated by the sympathetic nervous system • Skin conductance can be used as a measure of stress and pain in newborns What is New: • Skin conductance of newborns with neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS) differs significantly from the SC of non-substance-exposed newborns during the first 6 weeks of life • Skin conductance appears to reflect the increased distress of infants with NAS.

Neonatal abstinence syndrome: Pharmacologic strategies for the mother and infant

Opioid use in pregnancy has increased dramatically over the past decade. Since prenatal opioid use is associated with numerous obstetrical and neonatal complications, this now has become a major public health problem. In particular, in utero opioid exposure can result in neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS) which is a serious condition characterized by central nervous system hyperirritability and autonomic nervous system dysfunction. The present review seeks to define current practices regarding the approach to the pregnant mother and neonate with prenatal opiate exposure. Although the cornerstone of prenatal management of opioid dependence is opioid maintenance therapy, the ideal agent has yet to be definitively established. Pharmacologic management of NAS is also highly variable and may include an opioid, barbiturate, and/or α-agonist. Genetic factors appear to be associated with the incidence and severity of NAS. Establishing pharmacogenetic risk factors for the development of NAS has the potential for creating opportunities for "personalized genomic medicine" and novel, individualized therapeutic interventions.

Phenobarbital versus morphine in the management of neonatal abstinence syndrome, a randomized control trial

BACKGROUNDS

Evaluating the efficacy of the loading and tapering dose of Phenobarbital versus oral Morphine in the management of NAS.

METHODS

This randomized, open-label, controlled trial was conducted on 60 neonates born to illicit drugs dependent mothers at Vali-Asr and Akbar-Abadi hospitals, Tehran, Iran, who exhibited NAS requiring medical therapy. The neonates were randomized to receive either: Oral Morphine Sulfate or a loading dose of Phenobarbital followed by a tapering dose. The duration of treatment required for NAS resolution, the total hospital stay and the requirement for additional second line treatment were compared between the treatment groups.

RESULTS

The Mean ± Standard Deviation for the duration of treatment required for the resolution of NAS was 8.5 ± 5 days in the Morphine group and 8.5 ± 4 days in the Phenobarbital group (P = 0.9). The duration of total hospital stay was 12.6 ± 5.6 days in the Morphine group and 12.5 ± 5.3 days in the Phenobarbital group (P = 0.7). 3.3 % in the Morphine group versus 6.6 % in the Phenobarbital group required adjunctive treatment (P = 0.5).

CONCLUSIONS

There were no significant differences in the duration of treatment, duration of hospital stay, and the requirement for adjunctive treatment, between the neonates with NAS who received Morphine Sulfate and neonates who received a loading and tapering dose of Phenobarbital.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This study is registered at the Iranian Registry of Clinical Trials ( www.irct.ir ) which is a Primary Registry in the WHO Registry Network. (Registration Number =  IRCT201406239568N8 ).

Variation in treatment of neonatal abstinence syndrome in US children's hospitals, 2004-2011

OBJECTIVE

Neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS) is a drug withdrawal syndrome experienced by opioid-exposed infants. There is no standard treatment for NAS and surveys suggest wide variation in pharmacotherapy for NAS. Our objective was to determine whether different pharmacotherapies for NAS are associated with differences in outcomes and to determine whether pharmacotherapy and outcome vary by hospital.

STUDY DESIGN

We used the Pediatric Health Information System Database from 2004 to 2011 to identify a cohort of infants with NAS requiring pharmacotherapy. Mixed effects hierarchical negative binomial models evaluated the association between pharmacotherapy and hospital with length of stay (LOS), length of treatment (LOT) and hospital charges, after adjusting for socioeconomic variables and comorbid clinical conditions.

RESULT

Our cohort included 1424 infants with NAS from 14 children's hospitals. Among hospitals in our sample, six used morphine, six used methadone and two used phenobarbital as primary initial treatment for NAS. In multivariate analysis, when compared with NAS patients initially treated with morphine, infants treated with methadone had shorter LOT (incidence rate ratio (IRR) = 0.55; P < 0.0001) and LOS (IRR = 0.60; P < 0.0001). Phenobarbital as a second-line agent was associated with increased LOT (IRR = 2.09; P<0.0001), LOS (IRR = 1.78; P < 0.0001) and higher hospital charges (IRR = 1.84; P < 0.0001). After controlling for case-mix, hospitals varied in LOT, LOS and hospital charges.

CONCLUSION

We found variation in hospital in treatment for NAS among major US children's hospitals. In analyses controlling for possible confounders, methadone as initial treatment was associated with reduced LOT and hospital stay.

Development and implementation of a pharmacist-managed, neonatal and pediatric, opioid-weaning protocol

OBJECTIVES

To compare the length of wean and abstinence severity in neonatal and pediatric patients with neonatal abstinence syndrome or iatrogenic opioid dependence treated with a pharmacist-managed, methadone-based protocol compared with physician-managed patients treated with either methadone or dilute tincture of opium (DTO).

METHODS

This was a prospective, single-centered, interventional evaluation of 54 pharmacist-managed patients versus 53 retrospective, physician-managed patients. Wean duration and severity of neonatal abstinence syndrome were compared between groups using the Student t test.

RESULTS

Significantly shorter wean duration in in utero-exposed pharmacist-managed patients compared with patients on physician-managed DTO (11.7 days vs 24.2 days, p < 0.001), but not compared with patients on physician-managed methadone (11.7 days vs 47 days, p = 0.101). No statistically significant difference was seen in wean duration in iatrogenic-exposed pharmacist-managed patients compared with patients on either physician-managed DTO or methadone (8.69 days vs 14 days, p = 0.096) and (8.69 days vs 9.82 days, p = 0.34), respectively. There were significantly fewer abstinence scores >12 in pharmacist-managed patients versus physician-managed DTO, but not physician-managed methadone (2.05 vs 17.3, p = 0.008 and 2.05 vs 74.3, p = 0.119, respectively). Significantly fewer abstinence scores ≥8 × 3 consecutively were seen in pharmacist-managed patients compared with patients on either physician-managed DTO or methadone (2.89 vs 11.9, p = 0.01 and 2.89 vs 24, p < 0.001, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Use of a pharmacist-managed, methadone-based weaning protocol standardizes patient care and has the potential to decrease abstinence severity and shorten duration of wean versus physician-managed patients exposed to opioids in utero. Additionally, a methadone wean of 10% to 20% per day was well tolerated in both neonatal and pediatric patients.

Oral clonidine in the management of acquired opioid dependency

Clonidine is a nonnarcotic analgesic historically used as a nasal decongestant and more recently established as an antihypertensive agent in adults. Because of its sedative properties with few adverse effects, clonidine has also been reported to be an effective pharmacologic agent for the treatment of neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS). The use of oral clonidine as a primary or secondary agent in the treatment of NAS has been found to reduce hospitalization and duration of treatment in this population.

Pharmacologic management of the opioid neonatal abstinence syndrome

Opioid use in pregnant women has increased over the last decade. Following birth, infants with in utero exposure demonstrate signs and symptoms of withdrawal known as the neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS). Infants express a spectrum of disease, with most requiring the administration of pharmacologic therapy to ensure proper growth and development. Treatment often involves prolonged hospitalization. There is a general lack of high-quality clinical trial data to guide optimal therapy, and significant heterogeneity in treatment approaches. Emerging trends in the treatment of infants with NAS include the use of sublingual buprenorphine, transition to outpatient therapy, and pharmacogenetic risk stratification.

Formulation of buprenorphine for sublingual use in neonates

OBJECTIVES

The only medication used sublingually in the neonate is buprenorphine for the treatment of neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS). Compared with morphine, buprenorphine reduces the length of treatment and length of hospitalization in neonates treated for NAS. The objective of this study was to characterize the stability of ethanolic buprenorphine for sublingual administration.

METHODS

Buprenorphine solution was prepared and stored in amber glass source bottles at either 68°F to 77°F (20°C-25°C) or 36°F to 46°F (2.2°C-7.8°C). Samples were collected from each of these batches on days 0, 3, 7, 14, and 30. Additional samples were withdrawn at baseline from each batch and placed in oral dispensing syringes for 3 and 7 days. Buprenorphine concentration was assessed by liquid chromatography-electrospray ionization-tandem mass spectrometry.

RESULTS

Neither storage temperature (p=0.65) nor storage time (p=0.24) significantly affected buprenorphine concentrations. All of the mean concentrations, regardless of storage temperature, were above 95% of the labeled concentration, and the potency was maintained for samples stored either in the original amber glass source bottles or in oral syringes.

CONCLUSIONS

An ethanolic buprenorphine solution is stable at room temperature for 30 days.

Neonatal exposure to antiepileptic drugs disrupts striatal synaptic development

OBJECTIVE

Drug exposure during critical periods of brain development may adversely affect nervous system function, posing a challenge for treating infants. This is of particular concern for treating neonatal seizures, as early life exposure to drugs such as phenobarbital is associated with adverse neurological outcomes in patients and induction of neuronal apoptosis in animal models. The functional significance of the preclinical neurotoxicity has been questioned due to the absence of evidence for functional impairment associated with drug-induced developmental apoptosis.

METHODS

We used patch-clamp recordings to examine functional synaptic maturation in striatal medium spiny neurons from neonatal rats exposed to antiepileptic drugs with proapoptotic action (phenobarbital, phenytoin, lamotrigine) and without proapoptotic action (levetiracetam). Phenobarbital-exposed rats were also assessed for reversal learning at weaning.

RESULTS

Recordings from control animals revealed increased inhibitory and excitatory synaptic connectivity between postnatal day (P)10 and P18. This maturation was absent in rats exposed at P7 to a single dose of phenobarbital, phenytoin, or lamotrigine. Additionally, phenobarbital exposure impaired striatal-mediated behavior on P25. Neuroprotective pretreatment with melatonin, which prevents drug-induced neurodevelopmental apoptosis, prevented the drug-induced disruption in maturation. Levetiracetam was found not to disrupt synaptic development.

INTERPRETATION

Our results provide the first evidence that exposure to antiepileptic drugs during a sensitive postnatal period impairs physiological maturation of synapses in neurons that survive the initial drug insult. These findings suggest a mechanism by which early life exposure to antiepileptic drugs can impact cognitive and behavioral outcomes, underscoring the need to identify therapies that control seizures without compromising synaptic maturation.

Pharmacological treatment of neonatal opiate withdrawal: between the devil and the deep blue sea

Illicit drug use with opiates in pregnancy is a major global health issue with neonatal withdrawal being a common complication. Morphine is the main pharmacological agent administered for the treatment of neonatal withdrawal. In the past, morphine has been considered by and large inert in terms of its long-term effects on the central nervous system. However, recent animal and clinical studies have demonstrated that opiates exhibit significant effects on the growing brain. This includes direct dose-dependent effects on reduction in brain size and weight, protein, DNA, RNA, and neurotransmitters—possibly as a direct consequence of a number of opiate-mediated systems that influence neural cell differentiation, proliferation, and apoptosis. At this stage, we are stuck between the devil and the deep blue sea. There are no real alternatives to pharmacological treatment with opiates and other drugs for neonatal opiate withdrawal and opiate addiction in pregnant women. However, pending further rigorous studies examining the potential harmful effects of opiate exposure in utero and the perinatal period, prolonged use of these agents in the neonatal period should be used judiciously, with caution, and avoided where possible.

Changing mechanisms of opiate tolerance and withdrawal during early development: animal models of the human experience

Human infants may be exposed to opiates through placental transfer from an opiate-using mother or through the direct administration of such drugs to relieve pain (e.g., due to illness or neonatal surgery). Infants of many species show physical dependence and tolerance to opiates. The magnitude of tolerance and the nature of withdrawal differ from those of the adult. Moreover, the mechanisms that contribute to the chronic effects of opiates are not well understood in the infant but include biological processes that are both common to and distinct from those of the adult. We review the animal research literature on the effects of chronic and acute opiate exposure in infants and identify mechanisms of withdrawal and tolerance that are similar to and different from those understood in adults. These mechanisms include opioid pharmacology, underlying neural substrates, and the involvement of other neurotransmitter systems. It appears that brain circuitry and opioid receptor types are similar but that NMDA receptor function is immature in the infant. Intracellular signaling cascades may differ but data are complicated by differences between the effects of chronic versus acute morphine treatment. Given the limited treatment options for the dependent infant patient, further study of the biological functions that are altered by chronic opiate treatment is necessary to guide evidenced-based treatment modalities.