Laryngeal mask airway surfactant administration for prevention of morbidity and mortality in preterm infants with or at risk of respiratory distress syndrome

Non-invasive high-frequency ventilation in newborn infants with respiratory distress

BACKGROUND

Respiratory distress occurs in up to 7% of newborns, with respiratory support (RS) provided invasively via an endotracheal (ET) tube or non-invasively via a nasal interface. Invasive ventilation increases the risk of lung injury and chronic lung disease (CLD). Using non-invasive strategies, with or without minimally invasive surfactant, may reduce the need for mechanical ventilation and the risk of lung damage in newborn infants with respiratory distress.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the benefits and harms of nasal high-frequency ventilation (nHFV) compared to invasive ventilation via an ET tube or other non-invasive ventilation methods on morbidity and mortality in preterm and term infants with or at risk of respiratory distress.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and three trial registries in April 2023.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), cluster- or quasi-RCTs of nHFV in newborn infants with respiratory distress compared to invasive or non-invasive ventilation.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently selected the trials for inclusion, extracted data, assessed the risk of bias, and undertook GRADE assessment.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 33 studies, mostly in low- to middle-income settings, that investigated this therapy in 5068 preterm and 46 term infants. nHFV compared to invasive respiratory therapy for initial RS We are very uncertain whether nHFV reduces mortality before hospital discharge (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.20 to 2.18; 1 study, 80 infants) or the incidence of CLD (RR 0.38, 95% CI 0.09 to 1.59; 2 studies, 180 infants), both very low-certainty. ET intubation, death or CLD, severe intraventricular haemorrhage (IVH) and neurodevelopmental disability (ND) were not reported. nHFV vs nasal continuous positive airway pressure (nCPAP) used for initial RS We are very uncertain whether nHFV reduces mortality before hospital discharge (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.41 to 2.41; 4 studies, 531 infants; very low-certainty). nHFV may reduce ET intubation (RR 0.52, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.82; 5 studies, 571 infants), but there may be little or no difference in CLD (RR 1.35, 95% CI 0.80 to 2.27; 4 studies, 481 infants); death or CLD (RR 2.50, 95% CI 0.52 to 12.01; 1 study, 68 participants); or severe IVH (RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.36 to 3.78; 4 studies, 531 infants), all low-certainty evidence. ND was not reported. nHFV vs nasal intermittent positive-pressure ventilation (nIPPV) used for initial RS nHFV may result in little to no difference in mortality before hospital discharge (RR 1.86, 95% CI 0.90 to 3.83; 2 studies, 84 infants; low-certainty). nHFV may have little or no effect in reducing ET intubation (RR 1.33, 95% CI 0.76 to 2.34; 5 studies, 228 infants; low-certainty). There may be a reduction in CLD (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.95; 5 studies, 307 infants; low-certainty). A single study (36 infants) reported no events for severe IVH. Death or CLD and ND were not reported. nHFV vs high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) used for initial RS We are very uncertain whether nHFV reduces ET intubation (RR 2.94, 95% CI 0.65 to 13.27; 1 study, 37 infants) or reduces CLD (RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.46 to 2.98; 1 study, 37 participants), both very low-certainty. There were no mortality events before hospital discharge or severe IVH. Other deaths, CLD and ND, were not reported. nHFV vs nCPAP used for RS following planned extubation nHFV probably results in little or no difference in mortality before hospital discharge (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.64; 6 studies, 1472 infants; moderate-certainty). nHFV may result in a reduction in ET reintubation (RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.35 to 0.51; 11 studies, 1897 infants) and CLD (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.91; 10 studies, 1829 infants), both low-certainty. nHFV probably has little or no effect on death or CLD (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.06; 2 studies, 966 infants) and severe IVH (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.13; 3 studies, 1117 infants), both moderate-certainty. We are very uncertain whether nHFV reduces ND (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.37 to 2.29; 1 study, 74 infants; very low-certainty). nHFV versus nIPPV used for RS following planned extubation nHFV may have little or no effect on mortality before hospital discharge (RR 1.83, 95% CI 0.70 to 4.79; 2 studies, 984 infants; low-certainty). There is probably a reduction in ET reintubation (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.89; 6 studies, 1364 infants), but little or no effect on CLD (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.04; 4 studies, 1236 infants); death or CLD (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.08; 3 studies, 1070 infants); or severe IVH (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.10; 4 studies, 1162 infants), all moderate-certainty. One study reported there might be no difference in ND (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.35 to 2.16; 1 study, 72 infants; low-certainty). nHFV versus nIPPV following initial non-invasive RS failure nHFV may have little or no effect on mortality before hospital discharge (RR 1.44, 95% CI 0.10 to 21.33); or ET intubation (RR 1.23, 95% CI 0.51 to 2.98); or CLD (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.47); or severe IVH (RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.02 to 10.87); 1 study, 39 participants, all low- or very low-certainty. Other deaths or CLD and ND were not reported.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

For initial RS, we are very uncertain if using nHFV compared to invasive respiratory therapy affects clinical outcomes. However, nHFV may reduce intubation when compared to nCPAP. For planned extubation, nHFV may reduce the risk of reintubation compared to nCPAP and nIPPV. nHFV may reduce the risk of CLD when compared to nCPAP. Following initial non-invasive respiratory support failure, nHFV when compared to nIPPV may result in little to no difference in intubation. Large trials, particularly in high-income settings, are needed to determine the role of nHFV in initial RS and following the failure of other non-invasive respiratory support. Also, the optimal settings of nHVF require further investigation.

Updates in neonatal resuscitation: routine use of laryngeal masks as an alternative to face masks

Although positive-pressure ventilation (PPV) has traditionally been performed using a face mask in neonatal resuscitation, face mask ventilation for delivering PPV has a high failure rate due to mask leaks, airway obstruction, or gastric inflation. Furthermore, face mask ventilation is compromised during chest compressions. Endotracheal intubation in neonates requires a high skill level, with a first-attempt success rate of <50%. Laryngeal masks can transfer positive pressure more effectively even during chest compressions, resulting in a lower PPV failure rate compared to that of face masks in neonatal resuscitation. In addition, inserting a laryngeal mask is easier and more accessible than endotracheal intubation, and mortality rates do not differ between the 2 methods. Therefore, in neonatal resuscitation, laryngeal masks are recommended in infants with gestational age >34 weeks and/or with a birth weight >2 kg, in cases of unsuccessful face mask ventilation (as a primary airway device) or endotracheal intubation (as a secondary airway device, alternative airway). In other words, laryngeal masks are recommended when endotracheal intubation fails as well as when PPV cannot be achieved. Although laryngeal masks are commonly used in anesthetized pediatric patients, they are infrequently used in neonatal resuscitation due to limited experience, a preference for endotracheal tubes, or a lack of awareness among the healthcare providers. Thus, healthcare providers must be aware of the usefulness of laryngeal masks in depressed neonates requiring PPV or endotracheal intubation, which can promptly resuscitate these infants and improve their outcomes, resulting in decreased morbidity and mortality rates.

Prophylactic Oropharyngeal Surfactant for Preterm Newborns at Birth: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Preterm newborns at risk of respiratory distress syndrome are supported with continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP). Many newborns worsen despite CPAP and are intubated for surfactant administration, an effective therapy for treatment of respiratory distress syndrome. Endotracheal intubation is associated with adverse effects. Pharyngeal administration of surfactant to preterm animals and humans has been reported as an alternative.

Objective

To assess whether giving prophylactic oropharyngeal surfactant to preterm newborns at birth would reduce the rate of intubation for respiratory failure.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This unblinded, parallel-group randomized clinical trial (Prophylactic Oropharyngeal Surfactant for Preterm Infants [POPART]) was conducted from December 17, 2017, to September 11, 2020, at 9 tertiary neonatal intensive care units in 6 European countries. Newborns born before 29 weeks of gestation without severe congenital anomalies, for whom intensive care was planned, were eligible for inclusion. The data were analyzed from July 27, 2022, to June 20, 2023.

Intervention

Newborns were randomly assigned to receive oropharyngeal surfactant at birth in addition to CPAP or CPAP alone. Randomization was stratified by center and gestational age (GA).

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was intubation in the delivery room for bradycardia and/or apnea or in the neonatal intensive care unit for prespecified respiratory failure criteria within 120 hours of birth. Caregivers were not masked to group assignment.

Results

Among 251 participants (mean [SD] GA, 26 [1.5] weeks) who were well matched at study entry, 126 (69 [54.8%] male) with a mean (SD) birth weight of 858 (261) grams were assigned to the oropharyngeal surfactant group, and 125 (63 [50.4%] male) with a mean (SD) birth weight of 829 (253) grams were assigned to the control group. The proportion of newborns intubated within 120 hours was not different between the groups (80 [63.5%) in the oropharyngeal surfactant group and 81 [64.8%] in the control group; relative risk, 0.98 [95% CI, 0.81-1.18]). More newborns assigned to the oropharyngeal surfactant group were diagnosed with and treated for pneumothorax (21 [16.6%] vs 8 [6.4%]; P = .04).

Conclusions and Relevance

This randomized clinical trial found that administration of prophylactic oropharyngeal surfactant to newborns born before 29 weeks' GA did not reduce the rate of intubation in the first 120 hours of life. These findings suggest that administration of surfactant into the oropharynx immediately after birth in addition to CPAP should not be routinely used.

Trial Registration

EudraCT: 2016-004198-41.

Laryngeal mask airway surfactant administration for prevention of morbidity and mortality in preterm infants with or at risk of respiratory distress syndrome

BACKGROUND

Laryngeal mask airway surfactant administration (S-LMA) has the potential benefit of surfactant administration whilst avoiding endotracheal intubation and ventilation, ventilator-induced lung injury and bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD).

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the benefits and harms of S-LMA either as prophylaxis or treatment (rescue) compared to placebo, no treatment, or intratracheal surfactant administration via an endotracheal tube (ETT) with the intent to rapidly extubate (InSurE) or extubate at standard criteria (S-ETT) or via other less-invasive surfactant administration (LISA) methods on morbidity and mortality in preterm infants with or at risk of respiratory distress syndrome (RDS).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and three trial registries in December 2022.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), cluster- or quasi-RCTs of S-LMA compared to placebo, no treatment, or other routes of administration (nebulised, pharyngeal instillation of surfactant before the first breath, thin endotracheal catheter surfactant administration or intratracheal surfactant instillation) on morbidity and mortality in preterm infants at risk of RDS. We considered published, unpublished and ongoing trials.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion and extracted data. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included eight trials (seven new to this update) recruiting 510 newborns. Five trials (333 infants) compared S-LMA with surfactant administration via ETT with InSurE. One trial (48 infants) compared S-LMA with surfactant administration via ETT with S-ETT, and two trials (129 infants) compared S-LMA with no surfactant administration. We found no studies comparing S-LMA with LISA techniques or prophylactic or early S-LMA. S-LMA versus surfactant administration via InSurE S-LMA may have little or no effect on the composite outcome of death or BPD at 36 weeks' postmenstrual age (risk ratio (RR) 1.50, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.27 to 8.34, I 2 = not applicable (NA) as 1 study had 0 events; risk difference (RD) 0.02, 95% CI -0.07 to 0.10; I 2 = 0%; 2 studies, 110 infants; low-certainty evidence). There may be a reduction in the need for mechanical ventilation at any time (RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.78; I 2 = 27%; RD -0.14, 95% CI -0.22 to -0.06, I 2 = 89%; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 7, 95% CI 5 to 17; 5 studies, 333 infants; low-certainty evidence). However, this was limited to four studies (236 infants) using analgesia or sedation for the InSurE group. There was little or no difference for air leak during first hospitalisation (RR 1.39, 95% CI 0.65 to 2.98; I 2 = 0%; 5 studies, 333 infants (based on 3 studies as 2 studies had 0 events); low-certainty evidence); BPD among survivors to 36 weeks' PMA (RR 1.28, 95% CI 0.47 to 3.52; I 2 = 0%; 4 studies, 264 infants (based on 3 studies as 1 study had 0 events); low-certainty evidence); or death (all causes) during the first hospitalisation (RR 0.28, 95% CI 0.01 to 6.60; I 2 = NA as 2 studies had 0 events; 3 studies, 203 infants; low-certainty evidence). Neurosensory disability was not reported. Intraventricular haemorrhage ( IVH) grades III and IV were reported among the study groups (1 study, 50 infants). S-LMA versus surfactant administration via S-ETT No study reported death or BPD at 36 weeks' PMA. S-LMA may reduce the use of mechanical ventilation at any time compared with S-ETT (RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.71; RD -0.54, 95% CI -0.74 to -0.34; NNTB 2, 95% CI 2 to 3; 1 study, 48 infants; low-certainty evidence). We are very uncertain whether S-LMA compared with S-ETT reduces air leak during first hospitalisation (RR 2.56, 95% CI 0.11 to 59.75), IVH grade III or IV (RR 2.56, 95% CI 0.11 to 59.75) and death (all causes) during the first hospitalisation (RR 0.17, 95% CI 0.01 to 3.37) (1 study, 48 infants; very low-certainty evidence). No study reported BPD to 36 weeks' PMA or neurosensory disability. S-LMA versus no surfactant administration Rescue surfactant could be used in both groups. There may be little or no difference in death or BPD at 36 weeks (RR 1.65, 95% CI 0.85 to 3.22; I 2 = 58%; RD 0.08, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.19; I 2 = 0%; 2 studies, 129 infants; low-certainty evidence). There was probably a reduction in the need for mechanical ventilation at any time with S-LMA compared with nasal continuous positive airway pressure without surfactant (RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.85; I 2 = 0%; RD -0.24, 95% CI -0.40 to -0.08; I 2 = 0%; NNTB 4, 95% CI 3 to 13; 2 studies, 129 infants; moderate-certainty evidence). There was little or no difference in air leak during first hospitalisation (RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.23 to 1.88; I 2 = 0%; 2 studies, 129 infants; low-certainty evidence) or BPD to 36 weeks' PMA (RR 1.65, 95% CI 0.85 to 3.22; I 2 = 58%; 2 studies, 129 infants; low-certainty evidence). There were no events in either group for death during the first hospitalisation (1 study, 103 infants) or IVH grade III and IV (1 study, 103 infants). No study reported neurosensory disability.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In preterm infants less than 36 weeks' PMA, rescue S-LMA may have little or no effect on the composite outcome of death or BPD at 36 weeks' PMA. However, it may reduce the need for mechanical ventilation at any time. This benefit is limited to trials reporting the use of analgesia or sedation in the InSurE and S-ETT groups. There is low- to very-low certainty evidence for no or little difference in neonatal morbidities and mortality. Long-term outcomes are largely unreported. In preterm infants less than 32 weeks' PMA or less than 1500 g, there are insufficient data to support or refute the use of S-LMA in clinical practice. Adequately powered trials are required to determine the effect of S-LMA for prevention or early treatment of RDS in extremely preterm infants. S-LMA use should be limited to clinical trials in this group of infants.

Surfactant therapy guided by tests for lung maturity in preterm infants at risk of respiratory distress syndrome

BACKGROUND

Administration of various exogenous surfactant preparations has been shown to decrease lung injury and pneumothorax and improve survival in very preterm infants with respiratory distress syndrome (RDS). There is no consensus on the threshold for surfactant administration, to allow timely intervention and avoid over-treatment, also considering the invasiveness of the procedure and its cost. Rapid tests for lung maturity, which include the click test, lamellar body counts and stable microbubble test, might guide the identification of those infants needing surfactant administration.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of surfactant treatment guided by rapid tests for surfactant deficiency in preterm infants at risk for or having RDS. Comparison 1: In preterm infants at risk for RDS, does surfactant treatment guided by rapid tests for surfactant deficiency compared to prophylactic surfactant administration to all high-risk infants minimize the need for surfactant treatment and prevent bronchopulmonary dysplasia and mortality? Comparison 2: In preterm infants who require early respiratory support, does surfactant treatment guided by rapid tests for surfactant deficiency compared to surfactant therapy provided to infants with RDS diagnosed on clinical and radiologic criteria minimize the need for surfactant treatment and prevent bronchopulmonary dysplasia and mortality?

SEARCH METHODS

We searched in October 2022 CENTRAL, PubMed, Embase and three additional trial registries. We also screened the reference lists of included studies and related systematic reviews for studies not identified by the database searches.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs evaluating rapid tests after birth for surfactant deficiency in infants at high risk of RDS or requiring respiratory support. We specified two comparisons: 1)surfactant treatment guided by rapid tests for surfactant deficiency versus prophylactic surfactant administration to all high-risk infants in extremely preterm (less than 28 weeks' gestation) and very preterm (28 to 32 weeks' gestation); 2)surfactant treatment guided by rapid tests for surfactant deficiency versus surfactant therapy provided to preterm infants (less than 37 weeks' gestation) with RDS diagnosed on clinical and radiologic criteria.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methods. We used the fixed-effect model with risk ratio (RR) and risk difference (RD), with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for dichotomous data. Our primary outcomes were: neonatal mortality, mortality prior to hospital discharge, bronchopulmonary dysplasia and the composite outcome bronchopulmonary dysplasia or mortality. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included three RCTs enrolling 562 newborn infants in this review. No studies compared surfactant treatment guided by rapid tests for surfactant deficiency versus prophylactic surfactant administration to all high-risk infants. Comparing surfactant therapy guided by rapid tests for surfactant deficiency versus surfactant therapy provided to infants with RDS diagnosed on clinical and radiologic criteria. No studies reported neonatal mortality. Compared with surfactant therapy provided to infants with RDS diagnosed on clinical and radiologic criteria, the evidence is very uncertain about the effect of surfactant treatment guided by rapid tests for surfactant deficiency on mortality prior to hospital discharge: RR 1.25, 95% CI 0.65 to 2.41, RD 0.01, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.05, 562 participants, 3 studies; I² for RR and RD = 75% and 43%, respectively; very low-certainty evidence. Surfactant treatment guided by rapid tests for surfactant deficiency may result in little to no difference in bronchopulmonary dysplasia: RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.32, RD -0.02, 95% CI -0.08 to 0.04, 562 participants, 3 studies; I² for RR and RD = 0%; low-certainty evidence. No studies reported the composite outcome bronchopulmonary dysplasia or mortality. Surfactant treatment guided by rapid tests for surfactant deficiency may result in little to no difference in surfactant utilization (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.11, RD -0.02, 95% CI -0.10 to 0.06, 562 participants, 3 studies, I² for RR and RD = 63% and 65%, respectively, low-certainty evidence), and any pneumothorax (RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.15 to 1.92, RD -0.01, 95% CI -0.04 to 0.01, 506 participants, 2 studies, I² for RR and RD = 0%, low-certainty evidence) compared with surfactant therapy provided to infants with RDS diagnosed on clinical and radiologic criteria. No studies reported moderate to severe neurodevelopmental impairment. We identified two large ongoing RCTs.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

No studies compared surfactant treatment guided by rapid tests for surfactant deficiency to prophylactic surfactant administration to all high-risk infants. Low to very low-certainty evidence from three studies is available on surfactant therapy guided by rapid tests for surfactant deficiency versus surfactant therapy provided to infants with RDS diagnosed on clinical and radiologic criteria. No studies reported neonatal mortality, the composite outcome 'bronchopulmonary dysplasia or mortality', or neurodevelopmental outcomes. Compared with surfactant therapy provided to infants with RDS diagnosed on clinical and radiologic criteria, the evidence is very uncertain about the effect of surfactant treatment guided by rapid tests for surfactant deficiency on mortality prior to hospital discharge. Surfactant treatment guided by rapid tests for surfactant deficiency may result in little to no difference in bronchopulmonary dysplasia, surfactant utilization and any pneumothorax. The findings of the two large ongoing trials identified in this review are likely to have an important impact on establishing the effects of surfactant treatment guided by rapid tests for surfactant deficiency in preterm infants.

Surfactant therapy via thin catheter in preterm infants with or at risk of respiratory distress syndrome

BACKGROUND

Non-invasive respiratory support is increasingly used for the management of respiratory dysfunction in preterm infants. This approach runs the risk of under-treating those with respiratory distress syndrome (RDS), for whom surfactant administration is of paramount importance. Several techniques of minimally invasive surfactant therapy have been described. This review focuses on surfactant administration to spontaneously breathing infants via a thin catheter briefly inserted into the trachea.

OBJECTIVES

Primary objectives In non-intubated preterm infants with established RDS or at risk of developing RDS to compare surfactant administration via thin catheter with: 1. intubation and surfactant administration through an endotracheal tube (ETT); or 2. continuation of non-invasive respiratory support without surfactant administration or intubation. Secondary objective 1. To compare different methods of surfactant administration via thin catheter Planned subgroup analyses included gestational age, timing of intervention, and use of sedating pre-medication during the intervention.

SEARCH METHODS

We used the standard search strategy of Cochrane Neonatal to search the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), in the Cochrane Library; Ovid MEDLINE(R) and Epub Ahead of Print, In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, Daily and Versions(R); and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), on 30 September 2020. We also searched clinical trials databases and the reference lists of retrieved articles for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-randomised trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised trials comparing surfactant administration via thin catheter (S-TC) with (1) surfactant administration through an ETT (S-ETT), or (2) continuation of non-invasive respiratory support without surfactant administration or intubation. We also included trials comparing different methods/strategies of surfactant administration via thin catheter. We included preterm infants (at < 37 weeks' gestation) with or at risk of RDS.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Review authors independently assessed study quality and risk of bias and extracted data. Authors of all studies were contacted regarding study design and/or missing or unpublished data. We used the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 16 studies (18 publications; 2164 neonates) in this review. These studies compared surfactant administration via thin catheter with surfactant administration through an ETT with early extubation (Intubate, Surfactant, Extubate technique - InSurE) (12 studies) or with delayed extubation (2 studies), or with continuation of continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) and rescue surfactant administration at pre-specified criteria (1 study), or compared different strategies of surfactant administration via thin catheter (1 study). Two trials reported neurosensory outcomes of of surviving participants at two years of age. Eight studies were of moderate certainty with low risk of bias, and eight studies were of lower certainty with unclear risk of bias. S-TC versus S-ETT in preterm infants with or at risk of RDS Meta-analyses of 14 studies in which S-TC was compared with S-ETT as a control demonstrated a significant decrease in risk of the composite outcome of death or bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD) at 36 weeks' postmenstrual age (risk ratio (RR) 0.59, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.48 to 0.73; risk difference (RD) -0.11, 95% CI -0.15 to -0.07; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 9, 95% CI 7 to 16; 10 studies; 1324 infants; moderate-certainty evidence); the need for intubation within 72 hours (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.74; RD -0.14, 95% CI -0.18 to -0.09; NNTB 8, 95% CI; 6 to 12; 12 studies, 1422 infants; moderate-certainty evidence); severe intraventricular haemorrhage (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.96; RD -0.04, 95% CI -0.08 to -0.00; NNTB 22, 95% CI 12 to 193; 5 studies, 857 infants; low-certainty evidence); death during first hospitalisation (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.84; RD -0.02, 95% CI -0.10 to 0.06; NNTB 20, 95% CI 12 to 58; 11 studies, 1424 infants; low-certainty evidence); and BPD among survivors (RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.74; RD -0.08, 95% CI -0.11 to -0.04; NNTB 13, 95% CI 9 to 24; 11 studies, 1567 infants; moderate-certainty evidence). There was no significant difference in risk of air leak requiring drainage (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.33 to 1.02; RD -0.03, 95% CI -0.05 to 0.00; 6 studies, 1036 infants; low-certainty evidence). None of the studies reported on the outcome of death or survival with neurosensory disability. Only one trial compared surfactant delivery via thin catheter with continuation of CPAP, and one trial compared different strategies of surfactant delivery via thin catheter, precluding meta-analysis.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Administration of surfactant via thin catheter compared with administration via an ETT is associated with reduced risk of death or BPD, less intubation in the first 72 hours, and reduced incidence of major complications and in-hospital mortality. This procedure had a similar rate of adverse effects as surfactant administration through an ETT. Data suggest that treatment with surfactant via thin catheter may be preferable to surfactant therapy by ETT. Further well-designed studies of adequate size and power, as well as ongoing studies, will help confirm and refine these findings, clarify whether surfactant therapy via thin tracheal catheter provides benefits over continuation of non-invasive respiratory support without surfactant, address uncertainties within important subgroups, and clarify the role of sedation.

Supraglottic airway devices for administration of surfactant to newborn infants with respiratory distress syndrome: a narrative review

Surfactant is an effective treatment for respiratory distress syndrome, being particularly important for infants in whom continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) provides insufficient support. Supraglottic airway devices present an attractive option for surfactant delivery, particularly as an alternative to methods dependent on direct laryngoscopy, a procedural skill that is both difficult to learn and in which to maintain competence. Published studies provide encouraging data that surfactant administration by supraglottic airway device can be performed with a high rate of success and may reduce the need for subsequent intubation compared with either continued CPAP or surfactant administration via endotracheal tube. However, existing randomised controlled trials (RCTs) are heterogeneous in design and include just over 350 infants in total. To date, all RCT evidence has been generated in tertiary units, whereas the greatest potential for benefit from the use of these devices is likely to be in non-tertiary settings. Future research should investigate choice and utility of device in addition to safety and effectiveness of procedure. Importantly, studies conducted in non-tertiary settings should evaluate feasibility, meaningful clinical outcomes and the impact that this approach might have on infants and their families. Supraglottic airway devices may represent a simple and effective mode of surfactant administration that can be widely used by a variety of clinicians. However, further well-designed RCTs are required to determine their role, safety and effectiveness in both tertiary and non-tertiary settings before introduction into routine clinical practice.

Guidelines for surfactant replacement therapy in neonates

Surfactant replacement therapy (SRT) plays a pivotal role in the management of neonates with respiratory distress syndrome (RDS) because it improves survival and reduces respiratory morbidities. With the increasing use of noninvasive ventilation as the primary mode of respiratory support for preterm infants at delivery, prophylactic surfactant is no longer beneficial. For infants with worsening RDS, early rescue surfactant should be provided. While the strategy to intubate, give surfactant, and extubate (INSURE) has been widely accepted in clinical practice, newer methods of noninvasive surfactant administration, using thin catheter, laryngeal mask airway, or nebulization, are being adopted or investigated. Use of SRT as an adjunct for conditions other than RDS, such as meconium aspiration syndrome, may be effective based on limited evidence.

Study protocol for the POPART study-Prophylactic Oropharyngeal surfactant for Preterm infants: A Randomised Trial

INTRODUCTION

Many preterm infants develop respiratory distress syndrome (RDS), a condition characterised by a relative lack of surfactant. Endotracheal surfactant therapy revolutionised the care of preterm infants in the 1990s. However, supporting newborns with RDS with continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) and reserving endotracheal surfactant for those who develop respiratory failure despite CPAP yield better results than intubating all infants for surfactant. Half of preterm infants born before 29 weeks gestation initially managed with CPAP are intubated for surfactant. Intubation is difficult to learn and associated with adverse effects. Surfactant administration into the oropharynx has been reported in preterm animals and humans and may be effective. We wished to determine whether giving oropharyngeal surfactant at birth reduces the rate of endotracheal intubation for respiratory failure in preterm infants within 120 hours of birth.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Prophylactic Oropharyngeal surfactant for Preterm infants: A Randomised Trial (POPART, Eudract No. 2016-004198-41) is an investigator-led, unblinded, multicentre, randomised, parallel group, controlled trial. Infants are eligible if born at a participating centre before 29 weeks gestational age (GA) and there is a plan to offer intensive care. Infants are excluded if they have major congenital anomalies. Infants are randomised at birth to treatment with oropharyngeal surfactant (120 mg vial <26 weeks GA stratum; 240 mg vial 26-28⁺⁶ weeks GA stratum) in addition to CPAP or CPAP alone. The primary outcome is intubation within 120 hours of birth, for bradycardia and/or apnoea despite respiratory support in the delivery room or respiratory failure in the intensive care unit. Secondary outcomes include incidence of mechanical ventilation, endotracheal surfactant use, chronic lung disease and death before hospital discharge.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Approval for the study has been granted by the Research Ethics Committees at the National Maternity Hospital, Dublin, Ireland (EC31.2016) and at each participating site. The trial is being conducted at nine centres in six European countries. The study results will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

2016-004198-41; Pre-results.

Surfactant for pulmonary haemorrhage in neonates

BACKGROUND

In the 1960s and 1970s, pulmonary haemorrhage (PH) occurred mainly in full-term infants with pre-existing illness with an incidence of 1.3 per 1000 live births. Risk factors for PH included severity of illness, intrauterine growth restriction, patent ductus arteriosus (PDA), coagulopathy and the need for assisted ventilation. Presently, PH occurs in 3% to 5% of preterm ventilated infants with severe respiratory distress syndrome (RDS) who often have a PDA and have received surfactant. The cause of PH is thought to be due to rapid lowering of intrapulmonary pressure, which facilitates left to right shunting across a PDA and an increase in pulmonary blood flow. Retrospective case reports and one prospective uncontrolled study have shown promising results for surfactant in treating PH.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effect of surfactant treatment compared to placebo or no intervention on mortality and morbidities in neonates with PH.

SEARCH METHODS

For this update The Cochrane Library, Issue 2, 2012; MEDLINE; EMBASE; CINAHL; Clinicaltrials.gov; Controlled-trials.com; proceedings (2000 to 2011) of the Annual Meetings of the Pediatric Academic Societies (Abstracts2View) and Web of Science were searched on 8 February 2012.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials that evaluated the effect of surfactant in the treatment of PH in intubated term or preterm (< 37 weeks) neonates with PH. Infants were included up to 44 weeks' postmenstrual age. The interventions studied were intratracheal instillation of surfactant (natural or synthetic, regardless of dose) versus placebo or no intervention.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

If studies were identified by the literature search, the planned analyses included risk ratio, risk difference, number needed to treat to benefit or to harm for dichotomous outcomes, and mean difference for continuous outcomes, with their 95% confidence intervals. A fixed-effect model would be used for meta-analyses. The risk of bias for included trials would be assessed. Heterogeneity tests, including the I2 statistic, would be performed to assess the appropriateness of pooling the data and the results would be reported.

MAIN RESULTS

No trials were identified.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

No randomised or quasi-randomised trials that evaluated the effect of surfactant in PH were identified. Therefore, no conclusions from such trials can be drawn. In view of the promising results from studies with less strict study designs than a randomised controlled trial, there is reason to conduct further trials of surfactant for the treatment of PH in neonates.

Supraglottic airway devices for surfactant treatment: systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To compare surfactant administration via supraglottic airway device (SAD) vs. nasal CPAP alone or INSURE.

STUDY DESIGN

A systematic search of PubMed, EMBASE, SCOPUS, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Clinicaltrials.gov was performed. Articles meeting inclusion criteria (RCT, surfactant administration via SAD, laryngeal mask, I-gel) were assessed RESULTS: Five RCTs were eligible. Surfactant administration via SAD reduced the need for intubation/mechanical ventilation (RR 0.57, 95%CI 0.38-0.85) and short-term oxygen requirements (MD -8.00, 95%CI -11.09 to -4.91) compared to nCPAP alone. Surfactant administration via SAD reduced the need for intubation/mechanical ventilation (RR 0.43, 95%CI 0.31-0.61), but increased short-term oxygen requirements (MD 3.10, 95%CI 0.51-5.69) compared to INSURE approach.

CONCLUSIONS

In preterm infants with RDS, surfactant administration via SAD reduces the need for intubation/mechanical ventilation. Overall, available literature includes few, small, poor-quality studies. Surfactant administration via SAD should be limited to clinical trials.

Bronchopulmonary Dysplasia: An Update of Current Pharmacologic Therapies and New Approaches

Bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD) remains the most prevalent long-term morbidity of surviving extremely preterm infants and is associated with significant health care utilization in infancy and beyond. Recent advances in neonatal care have resulted in improved survival of extremely low birth weight (ELBW) infants; however, the incidence of BPD has not been substantially impacted by novel interventions in this vulnerable population. The multifactorial cause of BPD requires a multi-pronged approach for prevention and treatment. New approaches in assisted ventilation, optimal nutrition, and pharmacologic interventions are currently being evaluated. The focus of this review is the current state of the evidence for pharmacotherapy in BPD. Promising future approaches in need of further study will also be reviewed.

Surfactant therapy guided by tests for lung maturity in preterm infants at risk of respiratory distress syndrome

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

To assess the effects of surfactant treatment guided by rapid tests for surfactant deficiency in preterm infants at risk for or having RDS.

Comparison 1: In preterm infants at risk for RDS, does surfactant treatment guided by rapid tests for surfactant deficiency compared to prophylactic surfactant administration to all high‐risk infants minimize the need for surfactant treatment and prevent bronchopulmonary dysplasia and mortality?

Comparison 2: In preterm infants who require early respiratory support, does surfactant treatment guided by rapid tests for surfactant deficiency compared to surfactant therapy provided to infants with RDS diagnosed on clinical and radiologic criteria minimize the need for surfactant treatment and prevent bronchopulmonary dysplasia and mortality?

Planned subgroup analysis: gestational age, disease severity, timing of testing and treatment, surfactant preparation, exposure to antenatal steroids.

Randomized trial of laryngeal mask airway versus endotracheal intubation for surfactant delivery

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effectiveness of surfactant delivery via endotracheal tube (ETT) using an intubation-surfactant-rapid extubation approach with premedication) vs laryngeal mask airway (LMA) in preventing the need for mechanical ventilation in preterm neonates with moderate respiratory distress syndrome (RDS).

STUDY DESIGN

Moderately preterm infants diagnosed with RDS, receiving nasal continuous positive airway pressure with FiO2 0.30 to 0.60, were randomized to two groups at age 3 to 48 h. Those in the ETT group were intubated following premedication with atropine and morphine, whereas the LMA group received only atropine. Both groups received calfactant before a planned reinstitution of nasal continuous positive airway pressure, and had equivalent pre-specified criteria for subsequent mechanical ventilation and surfactant retreatment. The primary outcome was failure of surfactant treatment strategy to avoid mechanical ventilation; we differentiated early from late failures to assess the contribution of potential mechanisms such as respiratory depression versus less-effective surfactant delivery. Secondary outcomes addressed efficacy and safety end points.

RESULT

Sixty-one patients were randomized, one excluded and 30 analyzed in each group, with similar baseline characteristics. Failure rate was 77% in the ETT group and 30% in the LMA group (P<0.001). The difference was related to early failure, as late failure rates did not differ between groups. FiO2 decrease after surfactant and rates of adverse events were similar between groups.

CONCLUSION

Surfactant therapy through an LMA decreases the proportion of newborns with moderate RDS who require mechanical ventilation, when compared with a standard endotracheal intubation procedure with sedation. The efficacy of surfactant in decreasing RDS severity appears similar with both methods. Morphine premedication likely contributed to early post-surfactant failures.

The Role of Surfactant in Lung Disease and Host Defense against Pulmonary Infections

Pulmonary surfactant is essential for life as it lines the alveoli to lower surface tension, thereby preventing atelectasis during breathing. Surfactant is enriched with a relatively unique phospholipid, termed dipalmitoylphosphatidylcholine, and four surfactant-associated proteins, SP-A, SP-B, SP-C, and SP-D. The hydrophobic proteins, SP-B and SP-C, together with dipalmitoylphosphatidylcholine, confer surface tension-lowering properties to the material. The more hydrophilic surfactant components, SP-A and SP-D, participate in pulmonary host defense and modify immune responses. Specifically, SP-A and SP-D bind and partake in the clearance of a variety of bacterial, fungal, and viral pathogens and can dampen antigen-induced immune function of effector cells. Emerging data also show immunosuppressive actions of some surfactant-associated lipids, such as phosphatidylglycerol. Conversely, microbial pathogens in preclinical models impair surfactant synthesis and secretion, and microbial proteinases degrade surfactant-associated proteins. Deficiencies of surfactant components are classically observed in the neonatal respiratory distress syndrome, where surfactant replacement therapies have been the mainstay of treatment. However, functional or compositional deficiencies of surfactant are also observed in a variety of acute and chronic lung disorders. Increased surfactant is seen in pulmonary alveolar proteinosis, a disorder characterized by a functional deficiency of the granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor receptor or development of granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor antibodies. Genetic polymorphisms of some surfactant proteins such as SP-C are linked to interstitial pulmonary fibrosis. Here, we briefly review the composition, antimicrobial properties, and relevance of pulmonary surfactant to lung disorders and present its therapeutic implications.

Animal derived surfactant extract versus protein free synthetic surfactant for the prevention and treatment of respiratory distress syndrome

BACKGROUND

A wide variety of surfactant preparations have been developed and tested including synthetic surfactants and surfactants derived from animal sources. Although clinical trials have demonstrated that both synthetic surfactant and animal derived surfactant preparations are effective, comparison in animal models has suggested that there may be greater efficacy of animal derived surfactant products, perhaps due to the protein content of animal derived surfactant.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effect of animal derived surfactant to protein free synthetic surfactant preparations in preterm infants at risk for or having respiratory distress syndrome (RDS).

SEARCH METHODS

Searches were updated of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in The Cochrane Library (2014), PubMed, CINAHL and EMBASE (1975 through November 2014). All languages were included.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials comparing administration of protein free synthetic surfactants to administration of animal derived surfactant extracts in preterm infants at risk for or having respiratory distress syndrome were considered for this review.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data collection and analysis were conducted according to the standards of the Cochrane Neonatal Review Group.

MAIN RESULTS

Fifteen trials met the inclusion criteria. The meta-analysis showed that the use of animal derived surfactant rather than protein free synthetic surfactant resulted in a significant reduction in the risk of pneumothorax [typical relative risk (RR) 0.65, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.77; typical risk difference (RD) -0.04, 95% CI -0.06 to -0.02; number needed to treat to benefit (NNTB) 25; 11 studies, 5356 infants] and a marginal reduction in the risk of mortality (typical RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.79 to 0.99; typical RD -0.02, 95% CI -0.04 to -0.00; NNTB 50; 13 studies, 5413 infants).Animal derived surfactant was associated with an increase in the risk of necrotizing enterocolitis [typical RR 1.38, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.76; typical RD 0.02, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.04; number needed to treat to harm (NNTH) 50; 8 studies, 3462 infants] and a marginal increase in the risk of any intraventricular hemorrhage (typical RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.15; typical RD 0.02, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.05; 10 studies, 5045 infants) but no increase in Grade 3 to 4 intraventricular hemorrhage (typical RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.27; typical RD 0.01, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.03; 9 studies, 4241 infants).The meta-analyses supported a marginal decrease in the risk of bronchopulmonary dysplasia or mortality associated with the use of animal derived surfactant preparations (typical RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.00; typical RD -0.03, 95% CI -0.06 to 0.00; 6 studies, 3811 infants). No other relevant differences in outcomes were noted.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Both animal derived surfactant extracts and protein free synthetic surfactant extracts are effective in the treatment and prevention of respiratory distress syndrome. Comparative trials demonstrate greater early improvement in the requirement for ventilator support, fewer pneumothoraces, and fewer deaths associated with animal derived surfactant extract treatment. Animal derived surfactant may be associated with an increase in necrotizing enterocolitis and intraventricular hemorrhage, though the more serious hemorrhages (Grade 3 and 4) are not increased. Despite these concerns, animal derived surfactant extracts would seem to be the more desirable choice when compared to currently available protein free synthetic surfactants.

Surfactant for meconium aspiration syndrome in term and late preterm infants

BACKGROUND

Surfactant replacement therapy has been proven beneficial in the prevention and treatment of neonatal respiratory distress syndrome (RDS). The deficiency of surfactant or surfactant dysfunction may contribute to respiratory failure in a broader group of disorders, including meconium aspiration syndrome (MAS).

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effect of surfactant administration in the treatment of late preterm and term infants with meconium aspiration syndrome.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched The Cochrane Library (Issue 4, 2006), MEDLINE and EMBASE (1985 to December 2006), previous reviews including cross-references, abstracts, conference and symposia proceedings, expert informants, and journal handsearching, without language restrictions. We contacted study authors for additional data.We ran an updated search in November 2014 and searched the following sites for ongoing or recently completed trials: www.clinicaltrials.gov; www.controlled-trials.com; and www.who.int/ictrp.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials which evaluated the effect of surfactant administration in late preterm and term infants with meconium aspiration syndrome are included in the analyses.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We extracted data on clinical outcomes including mortality, treatment with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO), pneumothorax, duration of assisted ventilation, duration of supplemental oxygen, intraventricular haemorrhage (any grade and severe IVH), and chronic lung disease. We conducted data analyses in accordance with the standards of the Cochrane Neonatal Review Group.

MAIN RESULTS

Four randomised controlled trials met our inclusion criteria. The meta-analysis of four trials (326 infants) showed no statistically significant effect on mortality [typical risk ratio (RR) 0.98, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.41 to 2.39; typical risk difference (RD) -0.00, 95% CI -0.05 to 0.05]. There was no heterogeneity for this outcome (I² = 0% for both RR and RD). The risk of requiring extracorporeal membrane oxygenation was significantly reduced in a meta-analysis of two trials (n = 208); [typical RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.46 to 0.91; typical RD -0.17, 95% CI -0.30 to -0.04; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 6, 95% CI 3 to 25]. There was no heterogeneity for RR (1² = 0%) but moderate heterogeneity for RD (I² = 50%). One trial (n = 40) reported a statistically significant reduction in the length of hospital stay (mean difference -8 days, 95% CI -14 to -3 days; test for heterogeneity not applicable). There were no statistically significant reductions in any other outcomes studied (duration of assisted ventilation, duration of supplemental oxygen, pneumothorax, pulmonary interstitial emphysema, air leaks, chronic lung disease, need for oxygen at discharge or intraventricular haemorrhage).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In infants with MAS, surfactant administration may reduce the severity of respiratory illness and decrease the number of infants with progressive respiratory failure requiring support with ECMO. The relative efficacy of surfactant therapy compared to, or in conjunction with, other approaches to treatment including inhaled nitric oxide, liquid ventilation, surfactant lavage and high frequency ventilation remains to be tested.

The use of surfactant in the neonatal period- the known aspects, those still under research and those which need to be investigated further

Respiratory distress syndrome is pulmoner insufficiency caused by the lack of surfactant and the main reason of morbidity and mortality in preterm infants. Mothers at high risk of preterm birth should be transferred to perinatal centers with experience for respiratory distress syndrome and ante-natal steroids should be given before 35 weeks' of gestational age. Surfactant treatment should be applied to babies with or at high risk for respiratory distress syndrome. Prophylaxis should be given to infants of <26 weeks of gestational age and to infants requiring entubation in the delivery room. Nasal continuous positive airway pressure should be considered in infants with complete steroid treatment and without entubation need. Early surfactant may be given if entubation is performed during follow-up. Natural forms of surfactant should be preferred when needed. If the infant is stable, early extubation and non-invasive respiratory support should be considered. In this review, the recent studies' current data about surfactant treatment will be discussed.

Novel approaches to surfactant administration

Surfactant replacement therapy has been the mainstay of treatment for preterm infants with respiratory distress syndrome for more than twenty years. For the most part, surfactant is administered intratracheally, followed by mechanical ventilation. In recent years, the growing interest in noninvasive ventilation has led to novel approaches of administration. This paper will review these techniques and the associated clinical evidence.

Early versus delayed selective surfactant treatment for neonatal respiratory distress syndrome

BACKGROUND

Clinical trials have confirmed that surfactant therapy is effective in improving the immediate need for respiratory support and the clinical outcome of premature newborns. Trials have studied a wide variety of surfactant preparations used either to prevent (prophylactic or delivery room administration) or treat (selective or rescue administration) respiratory distress syndrome (RDS). Using either treatment strategy, significant reductions in the incidence of pneumothorax, as well as significant improvement in survival, have been noted. It is unclear whether there are any advantages to treating infants with respiratory insufficiency earlier in the course of RDS.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effects of early versus delayed selective surfactant therapy for newborns intubated for respiratory distress within the first two hours of life. Planned subgroup analyses included separate comparisons for studies utilizing natural surfactant extract and synthetic surfactant.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Oxford Database of Perinatal Trials, MEDLINE (MeSH terms: pulmonary surfactant; text word: early; limits: age, newborn: publication type, clinical trial), PubMed, abstracts, conference and symposia proceedings, expert informants, and journal handsearching in the English language. For the updated search in April 2012 we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, The Cochrane Library, 2012, Issue 1) and PubMed (January 1997 to April 2012).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized and quasi-randomized controlled clinical trials comparing early selective surfactant administration (surfactant administration via the endotracheal tube in infants intubated for respiratory distress, not specifically for surfactant dosage) within the first two hours of life versus delayed selective surfactant administration to infants with established RDS were considered for review.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data regarding clinical outcomes were excerpted from the reports of the clinical trials by the review authors. Subgroup analyses were performed based on type of surfactant preparation, gestational age, and exposure to prenatal steroids. Data analysis was performed in accordance with the standards of the Cochrane Neonatal Review Group.

MAIN RESULTS

Six randomized controlled trials met selection criteria. Two of the trials utilized synthetic surfactant (Exosurf Neonatal) and four utilized animal-derived surfactant preparations.The meta-analyses demonstrate significant reductions in the risk of neonatal mortality (typical risk ratio (RR) 0.84; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.74 to 0.95; typical risk difference (RD) -0.04; 95% CI -0.06 to -0.01; 6 studies; 3577 infants), chronic lung disease (typical RR 0.69; 95% CI 0.55 to 0.86; typical RD -0.04; 95% CI -0.06 to -0.01; 3 studies; 3041 infants), and chronic lung disease or death at 36 weeks (typical RR 0.83; 95% CI 0.75 to 0.91; typical RD -0.06; 95% CI -0.09 to -0.03; 3 studies; 3050 infants) associated with early treatment of intubated infants with RDS.Intubated infants randomized to early selective surfactant administration also demonstrated a decreased risk of acute lung injury including a decreased risk of pneumothorax (typical RR 0.69; 95% CI 0.59 to 0.82; typical RD -0.05; 95% CI -0.08 to -0.03; 5 studies; 3545 infants), pulmonary interstitial emphysema (typical RR 0.60; 95% CI 0.41 to 0.89; typical RD -0.06; 95% CI -0.10 to -0.02; 3 studies; 780 infants), and overall air leak syndromes (typical RR 0.61; 95% CI 0.48 to 0.78; typical RD -0.18; 95% CI -0.26 to -0.09; 2 studies; 463 infants).A trend toward risk reduction for bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD) or death at 28 days was also evident (typical RR 0.94; 95% CI 0.88 to 1.00; typical RD -0.04; 95% CI -0.07 to -0.00; 3 studies; 3039 infants). No differences in other complications of RDS or prematurity were noted.Only two studies reported on infants under 30 weeks' gestation. Decreased risk of neonatal mortality and chronic lung disease or death at 36 weeks' postmenstrual age was noted.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Early selective surfactant administration given to infants with RDS requiring assisted ventilation leads to a decreased risk of acute pulmonary injury (decreased risk of pneumothorax and pulmonary interstitial emphysema) and a decreased risk of neonatal mortality and chronic lung disease compared to delaying treatment of such infants until they develop worsening RDS.

The role of surfactant in respiratory distress syndrome

The key feature of respiratory distress syndrome (RDS) is the insufficient production of surfactant in the lungs of preterm infants. As a result, researchers have looked into the possibility of surfactant replacement therapy as a means of preventing and treating RDS. We sought to identify the role of surfactant in the prevention and management of RDS, comparing the various types, doses, and modes of administration, and the recent development. A PubMed search was carried out up to March 2012 using phrases: surfactant, respiratory distress syndrome, protein-containing surfactant, protein-free surfactant, natural surfactant, animal-derived surfactant, synthetic surfactant, lucinactant, surfaxin, surfactant protein-B, surfactant protein-C.Natural, or animal-derived, surfactant is currently the surfactant of choice in comparison to protein-free synthetic surfactant. However, it is hoped that the development of protein-containing synthetic surfactant, such as lucinactant, will rival the efficacy of natural surfactants, but without the risks of their possible side effects. Administration techniques have also been developed with nasal continuous positive airway pressure (nCPAP) and selective surfactant administration now recommended; multiple surfactant doses have also reported better outcomes. An aerosolised form of surfactant is being trialled in the hope that surfactant can be administered in a non-invasive way. Overall, the advancement, concerning the structure of surfactant and its mode of administration, offers an encouraging future in the management of RDS.

Surfactant for pulmonary haemorrhage in neonates

BACKGROUND

In the 1960s and 1970s, pulmonary haemorrhage (PH) occurred mainly in full-term infants with pre-existing illness with an incidence of 1.3 per 1000 live births. Risk factors for PH included severity of illness, intrauterine growth restriction, patent ductus arteriosus (PDA), coagulopathy and the need for assisted ventilation. Presently, PH occurs in 3% to 5% of preterm ventilated infants with severe respiratory distress syndrome (RDS) who often have a PDA and have received surfactant. The cause of PH is thought to be due to rapid lowering of intrapulmonary pressure, which facilitates left to right shunting across a PDA and an increase in pulmonary blood flow. Retrospective case reports and one prospective uncontrolled study have shown promising results for surfactant in treating PH.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effect of surfactant treatment compared to placebo or no intervention on mortality and morbidities in neonates with PH.

SEARCH METHODS

For this update The Cochrane Library, Issue 2, 2012; MEDLINE; EMBASE; CINAHL; Clinicaltrials.gov; Controlled-trials.com; proceedings (2000 to 2011) of the Annual Meetings of the Pediatric Academic Societies (Abstracts2View) and Web of Science were searched on 8 February 2012.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials that evaluated the effect of surfactant in the treatment of PH in intubated term or preterm (< 37 weeks) neonates with PH. Infants were included up to 44 weeks' postmenstrual age. The interventions studied were intratracheal instillation of surfactant (natural or synthetic, regardless of dose) versus placebo or no intervention.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

If studies were identified by the literature search, the planned analyses included risk ratio, risk difference, number needed to treat to benefit or to harm for dichotomous outcomes, and mean difference for continuous outcomes, with their 95% confidence intervals. A fixed-effect model would be used for meta-analyses. The risk of bias for included trials would be assessed. Heterogeneity tests, including the I(2) statistic, would be performed to assess the appropriateness of pooling the data and the results would be reported.

MAIN RESULTS

No trials were identified.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

No randomised or quasi-randomised trials that evaluated the effect of surfactant in PH were identified. Therefore, no conclusions from such trials can be drawn. In view of the promising results from studies with less strict study designs than a randomised controlled trial, there is reason to conduct further trials of surfactant for the treatment of PH in neonates.