Have we been down this road before?

LISA/MIST: Complex clinical problems almost never have easy solutions

Over the last 10 years, new techniques to administer surfactant have been promoted, based on their presumed lesser invasiveness and they have been generally called LISA (less invasive surfactant administration). We believe that the clinical potential of LISA techniques is currently overestimated. LISA lacks biological and pathophysiological background justifying its potential benefits. Moreover, LISA has been investigated in clinical trials without previous translational data and these trials are affected by significant flaws. The available data from these trials only allow to conclude that LISA is better than prolonged, unrestricted invasive ventilation with loosely described parameters, a mode of respiratory support that should be anyway avoided in preterm infants. We urge the conduction of high-quality studies to understand how to choose and titrate analgesia/sedation and optimize surfactant administration in preterm neonates. We offer a comprehensive, evidence-based review of the clinical data on LISA, their biases and the lack of physiopathology background.

Porcine versus bovine surfactant therapy for RDS in preterm neonates: pragmatic meta-analysis and review of physiopathological plausibility of the effects on extra-pulmonary outcomes

BACKGROUND

While porcine seems to be superior to bovine surfactants in terms of respiratory outcomes, it is unclear if a surfactant can improve extra-pulmonary outcomes in preterm neonates with respiratory distress syndrome and if there is any physiopathological/biological mechanism linking surfactant therapy to these outcomes. We aim to fill these knowledge gaps.

METHODS

Systematic and pragmatic review coupled with meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of bovine or porcine surfactants administered to treat RDS in preterm neonates; common extra-pulmonary neonatal intensive care outcomes were considered. As additional analysis, animal or human translational studies about mechanisms linking surfactant replacement to extra-pulmonary neonatal outcomes were also systematically reviewed.

RESULTS

Porcine surfactant is associated with lower incidence of patent ductus arteriosus (OR:0.655; 95%CI:0.460-0.931); p = 0.018; 12 trials; 1472 patients); prenatal steroids (coeff.:-0.009, 95%CI:-0.03-0.009, p = 0.323) and gestational age (coeff.:0.079, 95%CI:-0.18-0.34, p = 0.554) did not influence this effect size. No significant differences were found between porcine and bovine surfactants on neonatal intensive care unit length of stay (mean difference (days):-2.977; 95%CI:-6.659-0.705; p = 0.113; 8 trials; 855 patients), intra-ventricular hemorrhage of any grade (OR:0.860; 95%CI:0.648-1.139); p = 0.293; 15 trials; 1703 patients), severe intra-ventricular hemorrhage (OR:0.852; 95%CI:0.624-1.163); p = 0.313; 15 trials; 1672 patients), necrotizing entero-colitis (OR:1.190; 95%CI:0.785-1.803); p = 0.412; 9 trials; 1097 patients) and retinopathy of prematurity (OR:0.801; 95%CI:0.480-1.337); p = 0.396; 10 trials; 962 patients).

CONCLUSIONS

Physiopathological mechanisms explaining the effect of surfactant have been found for patent ductus arteriosus only, while they are lacking for all other endpoints. Porcine surfactant is associated with lower incidence of PDA than bovine surfactants. As there are no differences in terms of other extra-pulmonary outcomes and no physiopathological plausibility, these endpoints should not be used in future trials.

REGISTRATION

PROSPERO n.CRD42018100906.

Porcine vs bovine surfactant therapy for preterm neonates with RDS: systematic review with biological plausibility and pragmatic meta-analysis of respiratory outcomes

BACKGROUND

Bovine surfactants are known to be clinically equivalent but it is unclear if porcine or bovine surfactants at their licensed dose should be preferred to treat respiratory distress syndrome in preterm neonates.

METHODS

We performed a comprehensive review of biochemical and pharmacological features of surfactants to understand the biological plausibility of any clinical effect. We then performed a pragmatic meta-analysis comparing internationally marketed porcine and bovine surfactants for mortality and respiratory outcomes. Search for randomised controlled trials with no language/year restrictions and excluding "grey" literature, unpublished or non-peer reviewed reports was conducted, following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines and the most recent methodological recommendations.

RESULTS

Sixteen articles were included in the review and 14 in the meta-analysis (1491 neonates). 200 mg/kg poractant-α (a porcine surfactant) was associated with lower BPD/mortality (OR 0.632[95%CI:0.494, 0.809];p < 0.001),BPD (OR 0.688[95%CI:0.512, 0.925];p = 0.013), retreatment (OR 0.313[95%CI:0.187, 0.522];p < 0.0001), airleaks (OR 0.505[95%CI:0.308, 0.827];p = 0.006) and lung haemorrhage (OR 0.624[95%CI:0.388, 1];p = 0.051). Gestational age is associated with effect size for BPD (coefficient: 0.308 [95%CI:0.063, 0.554];p = 0.014) and surfactant retreatment (coefficient: -0.311 [95%CI:-0.595, - 0.028];p = 0.031).

CONCLUSION

200 mg/kg poractant-α is associated with better respiratory outcomes compared to bovine surfactants at their licensed dose. The effect of poractant-α on BPD and surfactant retreatment is greater at lowest and highest gestational ages, respectively.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO n.42017075251 .