Physiological Basis of Neonatal Aerodigestive Difficulties in Chronic Lung Disease

Lung ultrasound supports clinical evaluation of feeding competence development in preterm neonates

Introduction

The achievement of alimentary competencies is a milestone in the development of preterm neonates. Ten percent of neonates <37 weeks of gestational age and 25% of those VLBW experience swallowing disorders, with an increased risk of problems in the early phase of life (failure to thrive, growth retardation, inhalation, and consequent risk of pulmonary infection) and later in life due to delayed development of oromotor skills.The main diagnostic tools for swallowing disorders are endoscopic (fiber-optic endoscopic examination of swallowing, FEES) or radiographic (videofluoroscopic swallowing study, VFSS) exams. Given the invasiveness of these methods and the bias due to rheologic differences between bolus and contrast medium, FEES and VFSS are poorly reproducible. Moreover, neither of the technique is capable of detecting post-meal inhalations, especially microinhalations or those consequent to a whole meal rather than to a single swallowing.Lung ultrasound (LUS) is a widespread, repeatable, safe, fast point-of-care tool and we reported previous encouraging results in detecting silent and overt inhalation related to the meal in children with dysphagia/gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) risk factors.

Methods

We report a pilot study, that investigated LUS approach (performing imaging before and after meals) to assess feeding competence development in a cohort of n. 19 newborns <32 weeks of age.

Results

Meal monitoring by LUS did not show any significant difference in scoring before/after eating. The achievement of full enteral feeding correlates with GA at birth (p < 0.001) but not with LUS scoring. The introduction of the first meal by bottle correlates both with gestational age (p < 0.001) and ultrasound scores (p = 0.004). LUS score at 7 days of life resulted predictive for length of invasive/non-invasive respiratory support (p = 0.002) and length of oxygen supply (p = 0.001), while LUS score at 48 h of life did not (p n.s.).

Discussion

Our study suggests that the development of oral feeding skills is not strictly dependent on gestational age. Moreover, our research suggests the predominant role of LUS in predicting the time of readiness to oral feeding, as the LUS score can be a marker of respiratory and lung wellness, and consequently a predictor of neonate stability during deglutitory apnea.

The follow up of complex infants in an aerodigestive clinic

The current available literature evaluating pediatric multidisciplinary aerodigestive programs for the management of aerodigestive disorders in infants was reviewed. Multidisciplinary aerodigestive programs have emerged to provide coordinated and comprehensive care for the growing population of children with aerodigestive conditions, including complex airway, pulmonary, gastrointestinal, and feeding disorders, which are prevalent among infants discharged from the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU). The team approach central to aerodigestive clinics offers a comprehensive diagnostic workup and unified management plan through consolidated interdisciplinary clinics, combined endoscopic procedures, and regular team discussions, leading to improved resource utilization and health care outcomes. We review common conditions presenting in the NICU that benefit from the aerodigestive model of care, including esophageal atresia, prematurity, bronchopulmonary dysplasia with or without tracheostomy or ventilator dependence, and dysphagia.

Treatment of Pediatric Patients With High-Flow Nasal Cannula and Considerations for Oral Feeding: A Review of the Literature

PURPOSE

High-Flow Nasal Cannula (HFNC) has become an increasingly common means of noninvasive respiratory support in pediatrics and is being used in infants and children with respiratory distress both inside and outside of the intensive care units. Despite the widespread use of HFNC, there remains a paucity of data on optimal flow rates and its impact on morbidity, mortality, and desired outcomes. Given the scarcity of information in these critical areas, it is not surprising that guidelines for initiation of oral feeding do not exist. This review article will review HFNC mechanisms of action, its use in specific populations and settings, and finally what is known about initiation of feeding during this therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

The practice of withholding oral feeding solely, because of HFNC, is not supported in the literature at the time of this writing, but in the absence of safety data from clinical trials, clinicians should proceed with caution and consider patient-specific factors while making decisions about oral feeding. Well-controlled prospective clinical trials are needed for development of best practice clinical guidelines and attainment of optimal outcomes.

Safety of Bottle-Feeding Under Nasal Respiratory Support in Preterm Lambs With and Without Tachypnoea

Aim: Convalescing preterm infants often require non-invasive respiratory support, such as nasal continuous positive airway pressure or high-flow nasal cannulas. One challenging milestone for preterm infants is achieving full oral feeding. Some teams fear nasal respiratory support might disrupt sucking–swallowing–breathing coordination and induce severe cardiorespiratory events. The main objective of this study was to assess the safety of oral feeding of preterm lambs on nasal respiratory support, with or without tachypnoea.

Methods: Sucking, swallowing and breathing functions, as well as electrocardiogram, oxygen haemoglobin saturation, arterial blood gases and videofluoroscopic swallowing study were recorded in 15 preterm lambs during bottle-feeding. Four randomly ordered conditions were studied: control, nasal continuous positive airway pressure (6 cmH₂O), high-flow nasal cannulas (7 L•min^–1), and high-flow nasal cannulas at 7 L•min^–1 at a tracheal pressure of 6 cmH₂O. The recordings were repeated on days 7–8 and 13–14 to assess the effect of maturation.

Results: None of the respiratory support impaired the safety or efficiency of oral feeding, even with tachypnoea. No respiratory support systematically impacted sucking–swallowing–breathing coordination, with or without tachypnoea. No effect of maturation was found.

Conclusion: This translational physiology study, uniquely conducted in a relevant animal model of preterm infant with respiratory impairment, shows that nasal respiratory support does not impact the safety or efficiency of bottle-feeding or sucking–swallowing–breathing coordination. These results suggest that clinical studies on bottle-feeding in preterm infants under nasal continuous positive airway pressure and/or high-flow nasal cannulas can be safely undertaken.

Nasal respiratory support and tachypnea and oral feeding in full-term newborn lambs

Newborn infants with respiratory difficulties frequently require nasal respiratory support such as nasal continuous positive airway pressure (nCPAP) or high-flow nasal cannulae (HFNC). Oral feeding of these infants under nasal respiratory support remains controversial out of fear of aspiration and cardiorespiratory events. The main objective of this study was to evaluate the safety of oral feeding under different types of nasal respiratory support in newborn lambs without or with tachypnea. Eight lambs aged 4-5 days were instrumented to record sucking, swallowing, respiration, ECG, oxygen saturation, and arterial blood gases. Each lamb was given two bottles of 30 mL of milk with a pause of 30 s under videofluoroscopy in four conditions [no respiratory support, nCPAP 6 cmH₂O, HFNC 7 L/min, HFNC_CPAP (= HFNC 7 L/min + CPAP 6 cmH₂O)] administered in random order. The study was conducted in random order over 2 days, with or without standardized tachypnea induced by thoracic compression with a blood pressure cuff. Generalized linear mixed models were used to compare the four nasal respiratory supports in terms of safety (cardiorespiratory events and aspiration), sucking-swallowing-breathing coordination, and efficacy of oral feeding. Results reveal that no nasal respiratory support impaired the safety of oral feeding. Most of the few laryngeal penetrations we observed occurred with HFNC_CPAP. Nasal CPAP modified sucking-swallowing-breathing coordination, whereas the efficiency of oral feeding decreased under HFNC_CPAP. Results were similar with or without tachypnea. In conclusion, oral feeding under nasal respiratory support is generally safe in a term lamb, even with tachypnea.NEW & NOTEWORTHY The practice of orally feeding newborns suffering from respiratory problems while on nCPAP or HFNC remains controversial for fear of triggering cardiorespiratory events or aspiration pneumonia, or aggravating chronic lung disease. The present results show that bottle-feeding is generally safe in full-term lambs under nasal respiratory support, both without and with tachypnea.