A randomised controlled trial of morphine versus phenobarbitone for neonatal abstinence syndrome

Neonatal Abstinence Syndrome and Corresponding Pharmacotherapy Approaches from 2 University-affiliated Neonatal Intensive Care Units in Puerto Rico (2018-2020)

OBJECTIVE

Neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS) is a set of drug withdrawal symptoms suffered by neonates exposed to drugs in utero. Several studies have widely described NAS incidence and treatment approach; however, little is known regarding the incidence and manifestations of this disease in Puerto Rico (PR). The principal aim of this study was to describe NAS incidence in the neonatal units of hospitals affiliated with the University of PR in terms of occurrence, clinical manifestations, and treatment approaches.

METHODS

Our study evaluated the medical records of NAS babies diagnosed from 2018 through 2020 at 2 hospitals affiliated with the University of PR Medical Sciences Campus. Descriptive and inferential statistics were employed to analyze trends.

RESULTS

We identified 12 neonates diagnosed with NAS, 5 with low birthweights (<2500 g); for a NAS incidence of 2 cases per 1000 admitted for the 3 years of recollected data. The urine toxicology results revealed that 9 had experienced intrauterine polydrug exposure. Phenobarbital loading dose were determined on the day of diagnosis (indicated by Finnegan score). The first manifestation of NAS symptoms varied: 8 neonates showed symptoms within 48 hours after birth, whereas 4 had withdrawal symptoms within 72-120 hours of their births. Differences between dosing practices and guidelines were observed, ranging from a 0.69% to a 25% difference during treatment initiation.

CONCLUSION

Further research on the incidence of NAS in PR (national level) is needed for a deeper understanding that we hope will lead to the development of enhanced treatment protocols in PR.

Pragmatic, randomized, blinded trial to shorten pharmacologic treatment of newborns with neonatal opioid withdrawal syndrome (NOWS)

BACKGROUND

The incidence of maternal opioid use in the USA has increased substantially since 2000. As a consequence of opioid use during pregnancy, the incidence of neonatal opioid withdrawal syndrome (NOWS) has increased fivefold between 2002 and 2012. Pharmacological therapy is indicated when signs of NOWS cannot be controlled, and the objective of pharmacological therapy is to control NOWS signs. Once pharmacologic therapy has started, there is great variability in strategies to wean infants. An important rationale for studying weaning of pharmacological treatment for NOWS is that weaning represents the longest time interval of drug treatment. Stopping medications too early may not completely treat NOWS symptoms.

METHODS

This will be a pragmatic, randomized, blinded trial of opioid weaning to determine whether more rapid weaning, compared to slow wean, will reduce the number of days of opioid treatment in infants receiving morphine or methadone as the primary treatment for NOWS.

DISCUSSION

The proposed study is a pragmatic trial to determine whether a rapid-weaning intervention reduces the number of days of opioid treatment, compared to a slow-weaning intervention, and we powered the proposed study to detect a 2-day difference in the length of treatment. Hospitals will be able to use either morphine or methadone with the knowledge that we may find a positive treatment effect for both, one, or neither drugs.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT04214834. Registered January 2, 2020.

Opioid treatment 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 an opioid for treatment of NAS due to withdrawal from opioids in newborn infants.

SEARCH METHODS

We ran an updated search on 17 September 2020 in CENTRAL via Cochrane Register of Studies Web and MEDLINE via Ovid. We also searched clinical trials databases, conference proceedings and the reference lists of retrieved articles for eligible trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), quasi- and cluster-RCTs which enrolled infants born to mothers with opioid dependence and who were experiencing NAS requiring treatment with an opioid.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three review authors independently assessed trial eligibility and risk of bias, and independently extracted data. We used the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 16 trials (1110 infants) with NAS secondary to maternal opioid use in pregnancy. Seven studies at low risk of bias were included in sensitivity analysis. Opioid versus no treatment / usual care: a single trial (80 infants) of morphine and supportive care versus supportive care alone reported no difference in treatment failure (risk ratio (RR) 1.29, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.41 to 4.07; very low certainty evidence). No infant had a seizure. The trial did not report mortality, neurodevelopmental disability and adverse events. Morphine increased days hospitalisation (mean difference (MD) 15.00, 95% CI 8.86 to 21.14; very low certainty evidence) and treatment (MD 12.50, 95% CI 7.52 to 17.48; very low certainty evidence), but decreased days to regain birthweight (MD -2.80, 95% CI -5.33 to -0.27) and duration (minutes) of supportive care each day (MD -197.20, 95% CI -274.15 to -120.25). Morphine versus methadone: there was no difference in treatment failure (RR 1.59, 95% CI 0.95 to 2.67; 2 studies, 147 infants; low certainty evidence). Seizures, neonatal or infant mortality and neurodevelopmental disability were not reported. A single study reported no difference in days hospitalisation (MD 1.40, 95% CI -3.08 to 5.88; 116 infants; low certainty evidence), whereas data from two studies found an increase in days treatment (MD 2.71, 95% CI 0.22 to 5.21; 147 infants; low certainty) for infants treated with morphine. A single study reported no difference in breastfeeding, adverse events, or out of home placement. Morphine versus sublingual buprenorphine: there was no difference in treatment failure (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.36 to 1.74; 3 studies, 113 infants; very low certainty evidence). Neonatal or infant mortality and neurodevelopmental disability were not reported. There was moderate certainty evidence of an increase in days hospitalisation (MD 11.45, 95% CI 5.89 to 17.01; 3 studies, 113 infants), and days treatment (MD 12.79, 95% CI 7.57 to 18.00; 3 studies, 112 infants) for infants treated with morphine. A single adverse event (seizure) was reported in infants exposed to buprenorphine. Morphine versus diluted tincture of opium (DTO): a single study (33 infants) reported no difference in days hospitalisation, days treatment or weight gain (low certainty evidence). Opioid versus clonidine: a single study (31 infants) reported no infant with treatment failure in either group. This study did not report seizures, neonatal or infant mortality and neurodevelopmental disability. There was low certainty evidence for no difference in days hospitalisation or days treatment. This study did not report adverse events. Opioid versus diazepam: there was a reduction in treatment failure from use of an opioid (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.80; 2 studies, 86 infants; low certainty evidence). Seizures, neonatal or infant mortality and neurodevelopmental disability were not reported. A single study of 34 infants comparing methadone versus diazepam reported no difference in days hospitalisation or days treatment (very low certainty evidence). Adverse events were not reported. Opioid versus phenobarbital: there was a reduction in treatment failure from use of an opioid (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.35 to 0.74; 6 studies, 458 infants; moderate certainty evidence). Subgroup analysis found a reduction in treatment failure in trials titrating morphine to ≧ 0.5 mg/kg/day (RR 0.21, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.45; 3 studies, 230 infants), whereas a single study using morphine < 0.5 mg/kg/day reported no difference compared to use of phenobarbital (subgroup difference P = 0.05). Neonatal or infant mortality and neurodevelopmental disability were not reported. A single study (111 infants) of paregoric versus phenobarbital reported seven infants with seizures in the phenobarbital group, whereas no seizures were reported in two studies (170 infants) comparing morphine to phenobarbital. There was no difference in days hospitalisation or days treatment. A single study (96 infants) reported no adverse events in either group. Opioid versus chlorpromazine: there was a reduction in treatment failure from use of morphine versus chlorpromazine (RR 0.08, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.62; 1 study, 90 infants; moderate certainty evidence). No seizures were reported in either group. There was low certainty evidence for no difference in days treatment. This trial reported no adverse events in either group. None of the included studies reported time to control of NAS. Data for duration and severity of NAS were limited, and we were unable to use these data in quantitative synthesis.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Compared to supportive care alone, the addition of an opioid may increase duration of hospitalisation and treatment, but may reduce days to regain birthweight and the duration of supportive care each day. Use of an opioid may reduce treatment failure compared to phenobarbital, diazepam or chlorpromazine. Use of an opioid may have little or no effect on duration of hospitalisation or treatment compared to use of phenobarbital, diazepam or chlorpromazine. The type of opioid used may have little or no effect on the treatment failure rate. Use of buprenorphine probably reduces duration of hospitalisation and treatment compared to morphine, but there are no data for time to control NAS with buprenorphine, and insufficient evidence to determine safety. There is insufficient evidence to determine the effectiveness and safety of 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.

Maintenance agonist treatments for opiate-dependent pregnant women

BACKGROUND

The prevalence of opiate use among pregnant women can range from 1% to 2% to as high as 21%. Just in the United States alone, among pregnant women with hospital delivery, a fourfold increase in opioid use is reported from 1999 to 2014 (Haight 2018). Heroin crosses the placenta, and pregnant, opiate-dependent women experience a six-fold increase in maternal obstetric complications such as low birth weight, toxaemia, third trimester bleeding, malpresentation, puerperal morbidity, fetal distress and meconium aspiration. Neonatal complications include narcotic withdrawal, postnatal growth deficiency, microcephaly, neuro-behavioural problems, increased neonatal mortality and a 74-fold increase in sudden infant death syndrome. This is an updated version of the original Cochrane Review first published in 2008 and last updated in 2013.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of any maintenance treatment alone or in combination with a psychosocial intervention compared to no intervention, other pharmacological intervention or psychosocial interventions alone for child health status, neonatal mortality, retaining pregnant women in treatment, and reducing the use of substances.

SEARCH METHODS

We updated our searches of the following databases to February 2020: the Cochrane Drugs and Alcohol Group Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and Web of Science. We also searched two trials registers and checked the reference lists of included studies for further references to relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials which assessed the efficacy of any pharmacological maintenance treatment for opiate-dependent pregnant women.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used the standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

We found four trials with 271 pregnant women. Three compared methadone with buprenorphine and one methadone with oral slow-release morphine. Three out of four studies had adequate allocation concealment and were double-blind. The major flaw in the included studies was attrition bias: three out of four had a high dropout rate (30% to 40%), and this was unbalanced between groups. Methadone versus buprenorphine: There was probably no evidence of a difference in the dropout rate from treatment (risk ratio (RR) 0.66, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.37 to 1.20, three studies, 223 participants, moderate-quality evidence). There may be no evidence of a difference in the use of primary substances between methadone and buprenorphine (RR 1.81, 95% CI 0.70 to 4.68, two studies, 151 participants, low-quality evidence). Birth weight may be higher in the buprenorphine group in the two trials that reported data MD;-530.00 g, 95%CI -662.78 to -397.22 (one study, 19 particpants) and MD: -215.00 g, 95%CI -238.93 to -191.07 (one study, 131 participants) although the results could not be pooled due to very high heterogeneity (very low-quality of evidence). The third study reported that there was no evidence of a difference. We found there may be no evidence of a difference in the APGAR score (MD: 0.00, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.03, two studies,163 participants, low-quality evidence). Many measures were used in the studies to assess neonatal abstinence syndrome. The number of newborns treated for neonatal abstinence syndrome, which is the most critical outcome, may not differ between groups (RR 1.19, 95% CI 0.87 to1.63, three studies, 166 participants, low-quality evidence). Only one study which compared methadone with buprenorphine reported side effects. We found there may be no evidence of a difference in the number of mothers with serious adverse events (AEs) (RR 1.69, 95% CI 0.75 to 3.83, 175 participants, low-quality evidence) and we found there may be no difference in the numbers of newborns with serious AEs (RR 4.77, 95% CI 0.59, 38.49,131 participants, low-quality evidence). Methadone versus slow-release morphine: There were no dropouts in either treatment group. Oral slow-release morphine may be superior to methadone for abstinence from heroin use during pregnancy (RR 2.40, 95% CI 1.00 to 5.77, one study, 48 participants, low-quality evidence). In the comparison between methadone and slow-release morphine, no side effects were reported for the mother. In contrast, one child in the methadone group had central apnoea, and one child in the morphine group had obstructive apnoea (low-quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Methadone and buprenorphine may be similar in efficacy and safety for the treatment of opioid-dependent pregnant women and their babies. There is not enough evidence to make conclusions for the comparison between methadone and slow-release morphine. Overall, the body of evidence is too small to make firm conclusions about the equivalence of the treatments compared. There is still a need for randomised controlled trials of adequate sample size comparing different maintenance treatments.

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.

Therapeutic approaches for neonatal abstinence syndrome: a systematic review of randomized clinical trials

Neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS) which is observed in 55-94% of the newborns from opioids-taking mothers produces deleterious neurological symptoms. Various pharmacological therapies have been investigated in neonates with NAS. This article reviews all studies on NAS treatment to analyze the duration of treatment, length of hospitalization and possible drug adverse effects. The search was limited to the randomized clinical trials which examined the treatments of neonates with NAS. Scientific databases including PubMed, Cochrane Library, ISI Web of Science, Embase and Scopus were systematically searched. Retrieved articles were reviewed by two researchers and evaluated using the JADAD scoring system. Finally, the treatment duration, hospitalization length and drug side-effects were extracted. Methadone, buprenorphine and clonidine were found more effective than morphine. Diluted tincture of opium (DTO) in combination with phenobarbital or clonidine was significantly more effective than DTO alone. Clonidine was a significantly better adjunctive therapy than phenobarbital in reducing morphine treatment days. No significant difference was observed between morphine and DTO effectiveness. Deciding the optimal regimen to manage symptomatic NAS, as a single or an adjunct therapy is not possible based on the literature, due to the low quality, small size and short-term treatment considered in the published studies. Graphical abstract Process of selecting trials included in the present systematic review.

Pharmacological Treatments for Neonatal Abstinence Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis

IMPORTANCE

Incidence of neonatal abstinence syndrome is rising rapidly, and optimal pharmacotherapy may meaningfully reduce length of treatment.

OBJECTIVE

To compare pharmacological therapies for neonatal abstinence syndrome.

DATA SOURCES

Systematic review and network meta-analysis of Medline (1946-June 2018), Embase (1974-June 2018), Cochrane CENTRAL (1966-June 2018), Web of Science (1900-June 2018), and ClinicalTrials.gov (June 2018).

STUDY SELECTION

Randomized clinical trials of pharmacological treatments for neonatal abstinence syndrome alone or in combination with adjuvant treatments. Abstract, title, and full-text screening were conducted independently by 2 reviewers (T.D. and C.G.).

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Data extraction was conducted independently by 2 reviewers (T.D. and C.G.) according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA)-Network Meta-Analyses guidelines. Quality was assessed with the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool and data were pooled with fixed-effect models as a result of the low number of trials that were included in the analysis.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was the length of treatment. The length of stay, need for adjuvant therapy, and adverse events were considered as secondary outcomes.

RESULTS

Eighteen trials (N = 1072) were eligible for inclusion. The treatments that were included in the length of treatment analysis were buprenorphine, clonidine, diluted tincture of opium and clonidine, diluted tincture of opium, morphine, methadone, and phenobarbital. Sublingual buprenorphine was considered the optimal treatment for a reduction in the length of treatment (days: mean difference vs morphine, -12.75 [95% CI, -17.97 to -7.58]; median rank, 1 [3-1]) and length of stay (days: mean difference vs morphine, -11.43 [95% CI, -16.95 to -5.82]; median rank, 1 [3-1]) but not the need for adjuvant treatment (odds ratio vs morphine, 1.23 [95% CI, 0.46-3.44]; median rank, 3 [5-1]). The results were robust to bias but sensitive to imprecision.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

The current evidence suggests that buprenorphine is the optimal treatment for neonatal abstinence treatment, but limitations are considerable and wide-scale adoption requires a large multisite trial. Morphine, which is considered standard of care in most hospitals, was the lowest-ranked opioid for length of treatment and length of stay.

Neonatal abstinence syndrome: an update

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The current review provides an update focused on the evolving epidemiology of neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS), factors influencing disease expression, advances in clinical assessment of withdrawal, novel approaches to NAS treatment, and the emerging role of quality improvement in assessment and management of NAS.

RECENT FINDINGS

The rise in the incidence of NAS disproportionately occurred in rural and suburban areas. Polysubstance exposure and genetic polymorphisms have been shown to modify NAS expression and severity. New bedside assessments using a limited number of factors to identify infants with NAS result in fewer infants receiving pharmacotherapy. In addition, buprenorphine may be a promising therapeutic alternative to morphine to treat NAS. Lastly, local, state, and national quality improvement initiatives have emerged as an effective mechanism to advance the care of infants with NAS.

SUMMARY

NAS remains a critical public health issue associated with significant medical, economic, and personal burdens. Emerging data on associated risk factors, assessment of and treatment for NAS provide clinicians and hospitals with new knowledge and an urgency to promote standardization of care for infants with NAS.

Neonatal abstinence syndrome: where are we, and where do we go from here?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Over the last 15 years the prevalence of neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS) increased almost five-fold. A considerable diversity seems to prevail in the management of NAS. This review provides an overview of factors affecting the expression and course of NAS, and recent developments in NAS assessment and treatment.

RECENT FINDINGS

Apart from different pharmacological and nonpharmacological treatment modalities, maturity of the infant and genetic variations likely are (co)responsible for interpatient variability in NAS severity, despite similar maternal exposure. Recent efforts concerning the further development of NAS severity scoring systems focus on the development of brief screening measures; in addition, pupil diameter and skin conductance have been proposed as complements to observer-rated scales. The decrease in incidence of NAS begins in the appropriate management of medication assisted treatment of the mother.

SUMMARY

Mitigating the negative outcomes for infants affected by NAS, their mothers and the healthcare system implies, first and foremost, developing and implementing an organized protocol for the management of NAS, and the homogenous use of a standardized scoring system utilizing interobserver reliability and a guide for medication initiation, maintenance, and weaning which is consistent with traditional methods of treatment for neonates.

Initial Dosing and Taper Complexity of Methadone and Morphine for Treatment of Neonatal Abstinence Syndrome

Background: Methadone and morphine are commonly used to treat neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS). Limited data exist to describe the most appropriate initial doses and taper regimens of these agents. Objectives: Describe the median initial dose and frequency of methadone and morphine for NAS. Compare dose adjustments, time to symptom relief, and taper complexity between groups. Methods: Retrospective study of neonates receiving enteral methadone or morphine for NAS over a 4-year period. Data collection included medication regimen, abstinence scores based on the Modified Finnegan Neonatal Abstinence Scoring Tool, and adverse events. Planned home taper complexity was assessed using the Medication Taper Complexity Score–Revised (MTCS-R). The primary outcome was initial opioid dose. Secondary outcomes included number of dose adjustments, time to symptom relief, and MTCS-R score. Results: Fifty neonates were initially treated for NAS with methadone (n = 36) or morphine (n = 14). The median initial dose was 0.09 mg/kg (range = 0.03-0.2) for methadone and 0.04 mg/kg (range = 0.03-0.4) for morphine. The most common initial dosing interval was q8h for methadone versus q3h for morphine. Number of dose adjustments and time to symptom relief were similar between groups. Median MTCS-R scores were similar between groups. There was no difference in adverse events between groups. Limitations included small sample size, preference toward methadone use, and variability of initial opioid dosing and titration. Conclusions: There was significant variability in initial doses of both agents. Neonates receiving methadone required less frequent dosing than morphine, which may result in easier administration and may allow for safer outpatient administration.

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.

Population Pharmacokinetic Model of Sublingual Buprenorphine in Neonatal Abstinence Syndrome

OBJECTIVE

Neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS)--a clinical entity of infants from in utero exposure to psychoactive xenobiotic and buprenorphine--has been successfully used to treat NAS. However, nothing is known about the pharmacokinetics (PK) of buprenorphine in neonates with NAS. To our knowledge, this is the first study to investigate the population pharmacokinetic of sublingual buprenorphine in neonates with NAS.

DESIGN

A retrospective population PK analysis of: (1) neonates with NAS treated with sublingual buprenorphine in randomized, double blinded clinical study and (2) data from healthy adults from a previously published pharmacokinetic study.

SETTING

Neonatal intensive care unit and general clinical research unit.

PATIENTS

Twenty-four neonates with NAS and five healthy adults.

INTERVENTIONS

All participants received sublingual buprenorphine per study protocol.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

A total of 303 PK data from 29 neonates and adults were used for model development. A population pharmacokinetic analysis was conducted using a first order conditional estimation with interaction in the NONMEM software program. A two-compartment linear PK model with first-order absorption process best described the pharmacokinetics of sublingual buprenorphine in neonates. The apparent clearance (CL) of buprenorphine was linearly related to body weight and matured with increasing age via two distinct saturated pathways. A typical neonate with NAS (body weight, 2.9 kg; postnatal age; 5.4 days) had a CL of 3.5 L/kg/hour and elimination half-life of 11 hours. Phenobarbital did not affect the clearance of buprenorphine compared to neonates of similar age and weight.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first study to investigate the population PK of sublingual buprenorphine in neonatal NAS. To our knowledge, this is also the first report to describe the age-dependent changes of buprenorphine PK in this patient population. No buprenorphine dose adjustment is needed for neonates with NAS treated with buprenorphine and concurrent phenobarbital.

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 ).

Neonatal abstinence syndrome: essentials for the practitioner

The incidence of neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS) has increased dramatically during the past 15 years, likely due to an increase in antepartum maternal opiate use. Optimal care of these patients is still controversial because of the available published literature lacking sufficient sample size, placebo control, and comparative pharmacologic trials. Primary treatment for NAS consists of opioid replacement therapy with either morphine or methadone. Paregoric and tincture of opium have been abandoned because of relative safety concerns. Buprenorphine is emerging as a treatment option with promising initial experience. Adjunctive agents should be considered for infants failing treatment with opioid monotherapy. Traditionally, phenobarbital has been used as adjunctive therapy; however, results of clonidine as adjunctive therapy for NAS appear to be beneficial. Future directions for research in NAS should include validating a simplified scoring tool, conducting comparative studies, exploring home management options, and optimizing management through pharmacogenomics.

Review of the assessment and management of neonatal abstinence syndrome

Neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS) secondary to in-utero opioid exposure is an increasing problem. Variability in assessment and treatment of NAS has been attributed to the lack of high-quality evidence to guide management of exposed neonates. This systematic review examines available evidence for NAS assessment tools, nonpharmacologic interventions, and pharmacologic management of opioid-exposed infants. There is limited data on the inter-observer reliability of NAS assessment tools due to lack of a standardized approach. In addition, most scales were developed prior to the prevalent use of prescribed prenatal concomitant medications, which can complicate NAS assessment. Nonpharmacologic interventions, particularly breastfeeding, may decrease NAS severity. Opioid medications such as morphine or methadone are recommended as first-line therapy, with phenobarbital or clonidine as second-line adjunctive therapy. Further research is needed to determine best practices for assessment, nonpharmacologic intervention, and pharmacologic management of infants with NAS in order to improve outcomes.

Design considerations for point-of-care clinical trials comparing methadone and buprenorphine treatment for opioid dependence in pregnancy and for neonatal abstinence syndrome

RATIONALE

In recent years, the U.S. has experienced a significant increase in the prevalence of pregnant opioid-dependent women and of neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS), which is caused by withdrawal from in-utero drug exposure. While methadone-maintenance currently is the standard of care for opioid dependence during pregnancy, research suggests that buprenorphine-maintenance may be associated with shorter infant hospital lengths of stay (LOS) relative to methadone-maintenance. There is no "gold standard" treatment for NAS but there is evidence that buprenorphine, relative to morphine or methadone, treatment may reduce LOS and length of treatment.

DESIGN

Point-of-care clinical trial (POCCT) designs, maximizing external validity while reducing cost and complexity associated with classic randomized clinical trials, were selected for two planned trials to compare methadone to buprenorphine treatment for opioid dependence during pregnancy and for NAS. This paper describes design considerations for the Medication-assisted treatment for Opioid-dependent expecting Mothers (MOMs; estimated N = 370) and Investigation of Narcotics for Ameliorating Neonatal abstinence syndrome on Time in hospital (INFANTs; estimated N = 284) POCCTs, both of which are randomized, intent-to-treat, two-group trials. Outcomes would be obtained from participants' electronic health record at three participating hospitals. Additionally, a subset of infants in the INFANTs POCCT would be from mothers in the MOMs POCCT and, thus, potential interaction between medication treatment of mother and infant could be evaluated.

CONCLUSION

This pair of planned POCCTs would evaluate the comparative effectiveness of treatments for opioid dependence during pregnancy and for NAS. The results could have a significant impact on practice.

A multicenter cohort study of treatments and hospital outcomes in neonatal abstinence syndrome

OBJECTIVES

To compare pharmacologic treatment strategies for neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS) with respect to total duration of opioid treatment and length of inpatient hospital stay.

METHODS

We conducted a cohort analysis of late preterm and term neonates who received inpatient pharmacologic treatment of NAS at one of 20 hospitals throughout 6 Ohio regions from January 2012 through July 2013. Physicians managed NAS using 1 of 6 regionally based strategies.

RESULTS

Among 547 pharmacologically treated infants, we documented 417 infants managed using an established NAS weaning protocol and 130 patients managed without protocol-driven weaning. Regardless of the treatment opioid chosen, when we accounted for hospital variation, infants receiving protocol-based weans experienced a significantly shorter duration of opioid treatment (17.7 vs. 32.1 days, P < .0001) and shorter hospital stay (22.7 vs. 32.1 days, P = .004). Among infants receiving protocol-based weaning, there was no difference in the duration of opioid treatment or length of stay when we compared those treated with morphine with those treated with methadone. Additionally, infants treated with phenobarbital were treated with the drug for a longer duration among those following a morphine-based compared with methadone-based weaning protocol. (P ≤ .002).

CONCLUSIONS

Use of a stringent protocol to treat NAS, regardless of the initial opioid chosen, reduces the duration of opioid exposure and length of hospital stay. Because the major driver of cost is length of hospitalization, the implications for a reduction in cost of care for NAS management could be substantial.

Neonatal abstinence syndrome

Neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS) is a result of the sudden discontinuation of fetal exposure to substances that were used or abused by the mother during pregnancy. Withdrawal from licit or illicit substances is becoming more common among neonates in both developed and developing countries. NAS continues to be an important clinical entity throughout much of the world. NAS leads to a constellation of signs and symptoms involving multiple systems. The pathophysiology of NAS is not completely understood. Urine or meconium confirmation may assist the diagnosis and management of NAS. The Finnegan scoring system is commonly used to assess the severity of NAS; scoring can be helpful for initiating, monitoring, and terminating treatment in neonates. Nonpharmacological care is the initial treatment option, and pharmacological treatment is required if an improvement is not observed after nonpharmacological measures or if the infant develops severe withdrawal. Morphine is the most commonly used drug in the treatment of NAS secondary to opioids. An algorithmic approach to the management of infants with NAS is suggested. Breastfeeding is not contraindicated in NAS, unless the mother is taking street drugs, is involved in polydrug abuse, or is infected with HIV. Future studies are required to assess the long-term effects of NAS on children after prenatal exposure.

Maintenance agonist treatments for opiate-dependent pregnant women

BACKGROUND

The prevalence of opiate use among pregnant women can range from 1% to 2% to as high as 21%. Heroin crosses the placenta and pregnant, opiate-dependent women experience a six-fold increase in maternal obstetric complications such as low birth weight, toxaemia, third trimester bleeding, malpresentation, puerperal morbidity, fetal distress and meconium aspiration. Neonatal complications include narcotic withdrawal, postnatal growth deficiency, microcephaly, neuro-behavioural problems, increased neonatal mortality and a 74-fold increase in sudden infant death syndrome.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of any maintenance treatment alone or in combination with psychosocial intervention compared to no intervention, other pharmacological intervention or psychosocial interventions for child health status, neonatal mortality, retaining pregnant women in treatment and reducing the use of substances.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Drugs and Alcohol Group Trials Register (September 2013), PubMed (1966 to September 2013), CINAHL (1982 to September 2013), reference lists of relevant papers, sources of ongoing trials, conference proceedings and national focal points for drug research. We contacted authors of included studies and experts in the field.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials assessing the efficacy of any maintenance pharmacological treatment for opiate-dependent pregnant women.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used the standard methodological procedures expected by The Cochrane Collaboration.

MAIN RESULTS

We found four trials with 271 pregnant women. Three compared methadone with buprenorphine and one methadone with oral slow-release morphine. Three out of four studies had adequate allocation concealment and were double-blind. The major flaw in the included studies was attrition bias: three out of four had a high drop-out rate (30% to 40%) and this was unbalanced between groups.Methadone versus buprenorphine: the drop-out rate from treatment was lower in the methadone group (risk ratio (RR) 0.64, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.41 to 1.01, three studies, 223 participants). There was no statistically significant difference in the use of primary substance between methadone and buprenorphine (RR 1.81, 95% CI 0.70 to 4.69, two studies, 151 participants). For both, we judged the quality of evidence as low. Birth weight was higher in the buprenorphine group in the two trials that could be pooled (mean difference (MD) -365.45 g (95% CI -673.84 to -57.07), two studies, 150 participants). The third study reported that there was no statistically significant difference. For APGAR score neither of the studies which compared methadone with buprenorphine found a significant difference. For both, we judged the quality of evidence as low. Many measures were used in the studies to assess neonatal abstinence syndrome. The number of newborns treated for neonatal abstinence syndrome, which is the most critical outcome, did not differ significantly between groups. We judged the quality of evidence as very low.Methadone versus slow-release morphine: there was no drop-out in either treatment group. Oral slow-release morphine seemed superior to methadone for abstinence from heroin use during pregnancy (RR 2.40, 95% CI 1.00 to 5.77, one study, 48 participants). We judged the quality of evidence as moderate.Only one study which compared methadone with buprenorphine reported side effects. For the mother there was no statistically significant difference; for the newborns in the buprenorphine group there were significantly fewer serious side effects.In the comparison between methadone and slow-release morphine no side effects were reported for the mother, whereas one child in the methadone group had central apnoea and one child in the morphine group had obstructive apnoea.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We did not find sufficient significant differences between methadone and buprenorphine or slow-release morphineto allow us to conclude that one treatment is superior to another for all relevant outcomes. While methadone seems superior in terms of retaining patients in treatment, buprenorphine seems to lead to less severe neonatal abstinence syndrome. Additionally, even though a multi-centre, international trial with 175 pregnant women has recently been completed and its results published and included in this review, the body of evidence is still too small to draw firm conclusions about the equivalence of the treatments compared. There is still a need for randomised controlled trials of adequate sample size comparing different maintenance treatments.

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.

Neonatal abstinence syndrome: transitioning methadone-treated infants from an inpatient to an outpatient setting

OBJECTIVE

Each year in the US ∼50 000 neonates receive inpatient pharmacotherapy for the treatment of neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS). The objective of this study is to compare the safety and efficacy of a traditional inpatient only approach with a combined inpatient and outpatient methadone treatment program.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective review (2007 to 2009). Infants were born to mothers maintained on methadone in an antenatal substance abuse program. All infants received methadone for NAS treatment as inpatient. Methadone weaning for the traditional group (75 patients) was inpatient, whereas the combined group (46 patients) was outpatient.

RESULT

Infants in the traditional and combined groups were similar in demographics, obstetrical risk factors, birth weight, gestational age (GA) and the incidence of prematurity (34 and 31%). Hospital stay was shorter in the combined than in the traditional group (13 vs 25 days; P<0.01). Although the duration of treatment was longer for infants in the combined group (37 vs 21 days, P<0.01), the cumulative methadone dose was similar (3.6 vs 3.1 mg kg(-1), P=0.42). Follow-up information (at least 3 months) was available for 80% of infants in the traditional and 100% of infants in the combined group. All infants in the combined group were seen ≤72 h from hospital discharge. Breastfeeding was more common among infants in the combined group (24 vs 8% P<0.05). Following discharge there were no differences between the two groups in hospital readmissions for NAS. Prematurity (34 to 36 weeks GA) was the only predictor for hospital readmission for NAS in both groups (P=0.02, OR 5). Average hospital cost for each infant in the combined group was $13 817 less than in the traditional group.

CONCLUSION

A combined inpatient and outpatient methadone treatment in the management of NAS decreases hospital stay and substantially reduces cost. Additional studies are needed to evaluate the potential long-term benefits of the combined approach on infants and their families.

Ineffective morphine treatment regimen for the control of Neonatal Abstinence Syndrome in buprenorphine- and methadone-exposed infants

This study aimed to determine if morphine is effective in ameliorating Neonatal Abstinence Syndrome (NAS) symptoms to non-opioid-exposed control levels in methadone- and buprenorphine-exposed infants. A prospective, non-randomized comparison study with flexible dosing was undertaken in a large teaching maternity hospital in Australia. Twenty-five infants in the groups of buprenorphine-, methadone- and control non-opioid-exposed infants were compared (totaln= 75 infants). Oral morphine sulphate (1 mg/ml) was administered every 4 h to opioid agonist-exposed infants. Modified Finnegan Withdrawal Scale (MFWS) scores determined dosing: score of 8–10: 0.5 mg/kg/day, 11–13: 0.7 mg/kg/day and 14+: 0.9 mg/kg/day. Withdrawal score, amount of morphine administered and length of hospital stay, were used to assess NAS over a 4-week follow-up period. No controls achieved a score higher than 7 on the MFWS. There was no significant difference in the percentage of infants requiring treatment between methadone (60%) and buprenorphine (48%) infants. For treated infants, significantly (P< 0.01) more morphine was administered to methadone (40.07 ± 3.95 mg) compared with buprenorphine infants (22.77 ± 4.29 mg) to attempt to control NAS. Following treatment initiation, significantly more (P< 0.01) methadone (87%) compared with buprenorphine infants (42%) continued to exceed scoring thresholds for morphine treatment requirement, and non-opioid-exposed control infant scores. For treated infants, there was no significant difference in length of hospital stay between methadone and buprenorphine infants. Morphine treatment was not entirely effective in ameliorating NAS to non-opioid-exposed control symptom levels in methadone or buprenorphine infants. The regimen may be less effective in methadone compared with buprenorphine infants.

Neonatal drug withdrawal

Maternal use of certain drugs during pregnancy can result in transient neonatal signs consistent with withdrawal or acute toxicity or cause sustained signs consistent with a lasting drug effect. In addition, hospitalized infants who are treated with opioids or benzodiazepines to provide analgesia or sedation may be at risk for manifesting signs of withdrawal. This statement updates information about the clinical presentation of infants exposed to intrauterine drugs and the therapeutic options for treatment of withdrawal and is expanded to include evidence-based approaches to the management of the hospitalized infant who requires weaning from analgesics or sedatives.

Update on the pharmacologic management of neonatal abstinence syndrome

Although a statement on Neonatal Drug Withdrawal was published in 1998 by the American Academy of Pediatrics, pharmacologic management of neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS) remains a challenge. Published clinical trials are limited, restricting treatment decision making to practitioner's experience and preference rather than evidence-based medicine. To optimize withdrawal symptom prevention, drug selection is often based on the offending agent (opioids versus polysubstance exposure), clinical presentation, mechanism of action (agonist versus partial agonist/antagonist, receptor effects), pharmacokinetic parameters and available drug formulations. This review addresses risk factors and pathophysiology of NAS, summarizes parameters of common drugs used for the management of NAS, and reviews published literature of standard therapies as well as newer agents. Based on the current literature, paregoric is no longer recommended and oral morphine solutions remain the mainstay of therapy for opiate withdrawal. Other potential therapies include methadone, buprenorphine, phenobarbital and clonidine with the latter two agents as adjunctive therapies.

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.

Revised dose schema of sublingual buprenorphine in the treatment of the neonatal opioid abstinence syndrome

AIMS

More than half of infants exposed to opioids in utero develop neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS) of severity to require pharmacological therapy. Current treatments are associated with prolonged hospitalization. We sought to optimize the dose of sublingual buprenorphine in the treatment of NAS.

DESIGN

Randomized, Phase 1, open-label, active-control clinical trial comparing sublingual buprenorphine to oral morphine.

SETTING

Large, urban, tertiary care hospital.

PARTICIPANTS

Twenty-four term infants requiring pharmacological treatment for NAS.

MEASUREMENTS

Outcomes were neonatal safety, length of treatment and length of hospitalization.

FINDINGS

Sublingual buprenorphine was safe and effective. Infants treated with buprenorphine had a 23-day length of treatment compared to 38 days for those treated with morphine (P = 0.01), representing a 40% reduction. Length of hospital stay in the buprenorphine group was reduced 24%, from 42 to 32 days (P = 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Sublingual buprenorphine was safe in NAS, with a substantial efficacy advantage over standard of care therapy with oral morphine.

Opiate treatment for opiate withdrawal in newborn infants

BACKGROUND

Neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS) due to opiate withdrawal may result in disruption of the mother-infant relationship, sleep-wake abnormalities, feeding difficulties, weight loss and seizures.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness and safety of using an opiate compared to a sedative or non-pharmacological treatment for treatment of NAS due to withdrawal from opiates.

SEARCH STRATEGY

The review was updated in 2010 with additional searches CENTRAL, MEDLINE and EMBASE supplemented by searches of conference abstracts and citation lists of published articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized or quasi-randomized controlled trials of opiate treatment in infants with NAS born to mothers with opiate dependence.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Each author assessed study quality and extracted data independently.

MAIN RESULTS

Nine studies enrolling 645 infants met inclusion criteria. There were substantial methodological concerns in all studies comparing an opiate with a sedative. Two small studies comparing different opiates were of good methodology.Opiate (morphine) versus supportive care (one study): A reduction in time to regain birth weight and duration of supportive care and a significant increase in hospital stay was noted.Opiate versus phenobarbitone (four studies): Meta-analysis found no significant difference in treatment failure. One study reported opiate treatment resulted in a significant reduction in treatment failure in infants of mothers using only opiates. One study reported a significant reduction in days treatment and admission to the nursery for infants receiving morphine. One study reported a reduction in seizures, of borderline statistical significance, with the use of opiate.Opiate versus diazepam (two studies): Meta-analysis found a significant reduction in treatment failure with the use of opiate.Different opiates (six studies): there is insufficient data to determine safety or efficacy of any specific opiate compared to another opiate.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Opiates compared to supportive care may reduce time to regain birth weight and duration of supportive care but increase duration of hospital stay. When compared to phenobarbitone, opiates may reduce the incidence of seizures but there is no evidence of effect on treatment failure. One study reported a reduction in duration of treatment and nursery admission for infants on morphine. Compared to diazepam, opiates reduce the incidence of treatment failure. A post-hoc analysis generates the hypothesis that initial opiate treatment may be restricted to infants of mothers who used opiates only. In view of the methodologic limitations of the included studies the conclusions of this review should be treated with caution.

Fentanyl transdermal analgesia during pregnancy and lactation

This report describes an infant who was born to a mother with chronic pain treated with fentanyl 100 microg/h transdermal patch throughout her pregnancy and during lactation. On day of life 27, when the baby was feeding and gaining weight on maternal milk, samples of the baby's blood and maternal milk were sent for analysis. The mother's milk fentanyl level was 6.4 ng/ mL. The infant's blood fentanyl level was undetectable. This preliminary report suggests that fentanyl transdermal patch treatment might be a viable option for managing chronic pain during lactation.

Maternal methadone use in pregnancy: factors associated with the development of neonatal abstinence syndrome and implications for healthcare resources

OBJECTIVES

The objectives of this study were to investigate factors associated with the development of neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS) and to assess the implications for healthcare resources of infants born to drug-misusing women.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study from 1 January 2004 to 31 December 2006.

SETTING

Inner-city maternity hospital providing dedicated multidisciplinary care to drug-misusing women.

POPULATION

Four hundred and fifty singleton pregnancies of drug-misusing women prescribed substitute methadone in pregnancy.

METHODS

Case note review.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Development of NAS and duration of infant hospital stay.

RESULTS

45.5% of infants developed NAS requiring pharmacological treatment. The odds ratio of the infant developing NAS was independently related to prescribed maternal methadone dose rather than associated polydrug misuse. Breastfeeding was associated with reduced odds of requiring treatment for NAS (OR 0.55, 95% CI 0.34-0.88). Preterm birth did not influence the odds of the infant receiving treatment for NAS. 48.4% infants were admitted to the neonatal unit (NNU) 40% of these primarily for treatment of NAS. The median total hospital stay for all infants was 10 days (interquartile range 7-17 days). Infants born to methadone-prescribed drug-misusing mothers represented 2.9% of hospital births, but used 18.2% of NNU cot days.

CONCLUSIONS

Higher maternal methadone dose is associated with a higher incidence of NAS. Pregnant drug-misusing women should be encouraged and supported to breastfeed. Their infants are extremely vulnerable and draw heavily on healthcare resources.

Sublingual buprenorphine for treatment of neonatal abstinence syndrome: a randomized trial

OBJECTIVE

In utero exposure to drugs of abuse can lead to neonatal abstinence syndrome, a condition that is associated with prolonged hospitalization. Buprenorphine is a partial mu-opioid agonist used for treatment of adult detoxification and maintenance but has never been administered to neonates with opioid abstinence syndrome. The primary objective of this study was to demonstrate the feasibility and, to the extent possible in this size of study, the safety of sublingual buprenorphine in the treatment of neonatal abstinence syndrome. Secondary goals were to evaluate efficacy relative to standard therapy and to characterize buprenorphine pharmacokinetics when sublingually administered.

METHODS

We conducted a randomized, open-label, active-control study of sublingual buprenorphine for the treatment of opiate withdrawal. Thirteen term infants were allocated to receive sublingual buprenorphine 13.2 to 39.0 mug/kg per day administered in 3 divided doses and 13 to receive standard-of-care oral neonatal opium solution. Dose decisions were made by using a modified Finnegan scoring system.

RESULTS

Sublingual buprenorphine was largely effective in controlling neonatal abstinence syndrome. Greater than 98% of plasma concentrations ranged from undetectable to approximately 0.60 ng/mL, which is less than needed to control abstinence symptoms in adults. The ratio of buprenorphine to norbuprenorphine was larger than that seen in adults, suggesting a relative impairment of N-dealkylation. Three infants who received buprenorphine and 1 infant who received standard of care reached protocol-specified maximum doses and required adjuvant therapy with phenobarbital. The mean length of treatment for those in the neonatal-opium-solution group was 32 compared with 22 days for the buprenorphine group. The mean length of stay for the neonatal-opium-solution group was 38 days compared with 27 days for those in the buprenorphine group. Treatment with buprenorphine was well tolerated.

CONCLUSIONS

Buprenorphine administered via the sublingual route is feasible and apparently safe and may represent a novel treatment for neonatal abstinence syndrome.

Treating pregnant women dependent on opioids is not the same as treating pregnancy and opioid dependence: a knowledge synthesis for better treatment for women and neonates

AIMS

Through a novel synthesis of the literature and our own clinical experience, we have derived a set of evidence-based recommendations for consideration as guidance in the management of opioid-dependent pregnant women and infants.

METHODS

PubMed literature searches were carried out to identify recent key publications in the areas of pregnancy and opioid dependence, neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS) prevention and treatment, multiple substance abuse and psychiatric comorbidity.

RESULTS

Pregnant women dependent on opioids require careful treatment to minimize harm to the fetus and neonate and improve maternal health. Applying multi-disciplinary treatment as early as possible, allowing medication maintenance and regular monitoring, benefits mother and child both in the short and the long term. However, there is a need for randomized clinical trials with sufficient sample sizes.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Opioid maintenance therapy is the recommended treatment approach during pregnancy. Treatment decisions must encompass the full clinical picture, with respect to frequent complications arising from psychiatric comorbidities and the concomitant consumption of other drugs. In addition to standardized approaches to pregnancy, equivalent attention must be given to the treatment of NAS, which occurs frequently after opioid medication.

CONCLUSION

Methodological flaws and inconsistencies confound interpretation of today's literature. Based on this synthesis of available evidence and our clinical experience, we propose recommendations for further discussion.

Maintenance agonist treatments for opiate dependent pregnant women

BACKGROUND

The prevalence of opiate use among pregnant women ranges from 1% to 2% to as much as 21%. Heroin crosses the placenta and pregnant opiate dependent women experience a six fold increase in maternal obstetric complications such as low birth weight, toxaemia, 3rd trimester bleeding, malpresentation, puerperal morbidity, fetal distress and meconium aspiration. Neonatal complications include narcotic withdrawal, postnatal growth deficiency, microcephaly, neurobehavioral problems, increased neonatal mortality and a 74-fold increase in sudden infant death syndrome.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of any maintenance treatment alone or in combination with psychosocial intervention compared to no intervention, other pharmacological intervention or psychosocial interventions on child health status, neonatal mortality, retaining pregnant women in treatment, and reducing use of substances

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched Cochrane Drugs and Alcohol Group' Register of Trials (June 2007), PubMed (1966 - June 2007), CINAHL (1982- June 2007), reference lists of relevant papers, sources of ongoing trials, conference proceedings, National focal points for drug research. Authors of included studies and experts in the field were contacted.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials enrolling opiate dependent pregnant women

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

The authors assessed independently the studies for inclusion and methodological quality. Doubts were solved by discussion.

MAIN RESULTS

We found three trials with 96 pregnant women. Two compared methadone with buprenorphine and one methadone with oral slow morphine. For the women there was no difference in drop out rate RR 1.00 (95% CI 0.41 to 2.44) and use of primary substance RR 2.50 (95% CI 0.11 to 54.87) between methadone and buprenorphine, whereas oral slow morphine seemed superior to methadone in abstaining women from the use of heroin RR 2.40 (95% CI 1.00 to 5.77)For the newborns in one trial buprenorphine performed better than methadone for birth weight WMD -530 gr (95% CI -662 to -397), this result is not confirmed in the other trial. For the APGAR score both studies didn't find significant difference . No differences for NAS measures used. Comparing methadone with oral slow morphine no differences for birth weight and mean duration of NAS. The APGAR score wasn't considered.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We didn't find any significant difference between the drugs compared both for mother and for child outcomes; the trials retrieved were too few and the sample size too small to make firm conclusion about the superiority of one treatment over another. There is an urgent need of big randomized controlled trials.

Importance and challenges of studying marketed drugs: what is a phase IV study? Common clinical research designs, registries, and self-reporting systems

The new drug application database submitted to the US Food and Drug Administration for drug approval (phases I-III or phases 1-3) is limited both in scope and size. Although randomized controlled trials, the hallmark of phase III trials, are the gold standard for the drug-approval process, they invariably have a number of limitations, including relatively small sample sizes, selective populations, short follow-up, the use of intermediate (surrogate) endpoints (almost always), and limited generalizability. The challenges of monitoring drugs once approved are also numerous. After approval by the Food and Drug Administration, marketed drugs undergo continued scrutiny, and this scrutiny is increasing because of problems that have surfaced with some drugs after their approval. Postmarketing research includes a variety of study designs and the use of registries and self-reporting of drug side effects. Along with this has come great confusion about what postmarketing research is and what a phase IV study is. Among the important strengths of phase IV research are the exposure of a broader range of patients to the drug under study, resulting in more "real-world" information about the drug's safety and efficacy, and consideration of a broader range of clinical endpoints. As a result, phase IV, or postmarketing research, has become an integral part of the drug evaluation process for a wide range of agents. The authors discuss the different types of study designs that are common under the phase IV terminology and provide some examples. They also discuss the use of registries and self-reporting of adverse events using the MedWatch System.

Variability in the evaluation and management of opiate-exposed newborns in Maryland

During 2003 and 2004 an estimated 2000 pregnant women and 31 000 nonpregnant women aged 15 to 44 reported using heroin. The majority of those newborns exposed in utero to opioids will develop symptoms of neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS). Standardized guidelines for the evaluation and management of opiate-exposed newborns are lacking. The objective of this study was to document variations in the evaluation and management of opiate-exposed newborns among Maryland hospitals using a 13-item phone survey. Twenty-seven (82%) of the hospitals completed the survey. Staff at every hospital reported that they delivered opiate-exposed infants, however only 52% reported using a standardized evaluation and treatment protocol for this population consisting of guidelines for maternal toxicology screening, length-of-stay criteria and a monitoring tool for drug-exposed infants, infant supportive care techniques, and pharmacologic treatment guidelines. Significant variability exists in the evaluation and management of opiate-exposed newborns in Maryland. Validated, evidence-based guidelines are needed to standardize the care of these vulnerable newborns across all hospital settings.

Managing drug withdrawal in the newborn infant

The management of the infant exposed to drugs in utero poses significant challenges. Symptoms and signs of neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS) are non-specific but most commonly associated with withdrawal from maternal opioids. A high index of suspicion is required when presented with an infant who could be manifesting symptoms of NAS. In the absence of a reliable history of maternal drug exposure, analysis of neonatal meconium or urine may be indicated. Approximately 90% of infants exposed to opioids will exhibit signs of NAS, although a smaller proportion will require pharmacological treatment. Although few studies have evaluated the advantages of different therapeutic agents and strategies, opioid withdrawal is best treated initially with opioid medication. Supportive care of the infant should include assessment of the adequacy of feeding, evaluation of social circumstances (particularly child protection issues) and surveillance for transmission of viral infection.

Management of neonatal abstinence syndrome in neonates born to opioid maintained women

Neonates born to opioid-maintained mothers are at risk of developing neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS), which often requires pharmacological treatment. This study examined the effect of opioid maintenance treatment on the incidence and timing of NAS, and compared two different NAS treatments (phenobarbital versus morphine hydrochloride). Fifty-three neonates born to opioid-maintained mothers were included in this study. The mothers received methadone (n=22), slow-release oral morphine (n=17) or buprenorphine (n=14) throughout pregnancy. Irrespective of maintenance treatment, all neonates showed APGAR scores comparable to infants of non-opioid dependent mothers. No difference was found between the three maintenance groups regarding neonatal weight, length or head circumference. Sixty percent (n=32) of neonates required treatment for NAS [68% in the methadone-maintained group (n=15), 82% in the morphine-maintained group (n=14), and 21% in the buprenorphine-maintained group (n=3)]. The mean duration from birth to requirement of NAS treatment was 33 h for the morphine-maintained group, 34 h for the buprenorphine-maintained group and 58 h for the methadone-maintained group. In neonates requiring NAS treatment, those receiving morphine required a significantly shorter mean duration of treatment (9.9 days) versus those treated with phenobarbital (17.7 days). Results suggest that morphine hydrochloride is preferable for neonates suffering NAS due to opioid withdrawal.

Methadone-exposed newborn infants: outcome after alterations to a service for mothers and infants

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the impact of a shared care approach in clinical management with a drug liaison midwife (DLM) service for mothers and infants established in 1995-1996 in an inner city area and to address the problem of congenital abnormality and microcephaly with fetal drug exposure.

METHODS

Descriptive analysis of data in live births of women enrolled in a methadone maintenance programme in 1991-1994 (n = 78) and 1997-2001 (n = 98), including time spent in hospital, treatment for neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS), admission to the neonatal medical unit (NMU) and follow-up for child health checks.

RESULTS

In 1997-2001 compared with 1991-1994, the mothers used more methadone in the last week of pregnancy (median 40.0 mg/day vs. 21.5 mg/day, P = 0.0006) and there were more preterm deliveries (36% vs. 21%, P = 0.03). The infants spent less time in hospital (median 5 days vs. 28 days, P < 0.0001), a smaller proportion had treatment for NAS (14% vs. 79%, P < 0.0001), and NMU admission was reduced (median 14 days vs. 26 days, P < 0.0003). Neonatal convulsions (P = 0.0001) and jaundice (P < 0.001) occurred less frequently, and more infants were breastfed (P = 0.001). One infant in each study group had a cleft palate and none had microcephaly. Child health checks for 18-24 months showed a favourable outcome in 1997-2001.

CONCLUSIONS

We altered antenatal care and modified neonatal management, subsequently infants spent less time in hospital and NMU admissions were reduced with less NAS treatment. Congenital abnormalities and microcephaly were not common and as regular child health checks were possible, the impact of the DLM service in shared management merits further investigation, for mother-infant bonding and developmental outcome.

Management of the newborn infant affected by maternal opiates and other drugs of dependency

Illicit drug use during pregnancy is common and probably underestimated in the majority of published studies. The infant exposed to opiates or other drugs of dependency during intrauterine development is at risk for post-natal withdrawal as well as to long-term problems that are associated with drug-effects and often, adverse social circumstances. This article examines the early management of the infant and mother for detection and monitoring of drug-exposure, pharmacological intervention for withdrawal and the management of associated, particularly infective and psychosocial, problems. Practical concerns surrounding these issues are discussed and further research on psychosocial intervention to improve long-term outcome are much needed.

A Chart Review Comparing Paregoric to Methadone in the Treatment of Neonatal Opioid Withdrawal

Neonatal opioid withdrawal often requires treatment but there have been few recent studies of current pharmacological interventions to guide treatment. This retrospective chart review provides an exploratory examination of newborns treated with either methadone or paregoric for opioid withdrawal and outlines dosage ranges and intervals, side effects, and clinical outcomes of the two regimens. The outcome variables examined were time to resolution of withdrawal symptoms, rate of decrease in symptom severity, and length of hospital stay. There were no observed differences in outcome variables between the two treatment groups and side effect profiles were similar. Dosages, dosage intervals, and tapering regimens were consistent with American Academy of Pediatrics recommendations. Although the sample size is small and standardized regimens were not used, this study provides preliminary data about dosing levels and dosing intervals of these two pharmacologic treatment agents. Both groups of infants had favorable outcomes, although given the variation in treatment regimens it is difficult to draw an equation of equivalency. These results are applicable to the design of future studies of pharmacological interventions.

Methadone versus buprenorphine in pregnant addicts: a double-blind, double-dummy comparison study

AIMS

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of methadone versus buprenorphine treatment in pregnant opioid-dependent women.

DESIGN

Randomized, double-dummy, double-blind, flexible-dosing comparison study.

SETTING

Addiction Clinic at the Medical University of Vienna, Austria.

PARTICIPANTS

Eighteen women were assigned randomly to receive either methadone (n = 9) or buprenorphine (n = 9) during weeks 24-29 of pregnancy. After dropouts, data were available from 14 cases (six in the methadone and eight in the buprenorphine group).

INTERVENTION

Sublingual buprenorphine tablets (8-24 mg/day) or oral methadone solution (40-100 mg/day), with matched placebos.

MEASUREMENTS

Mothers: retention in treatment, urine toxicology and nicotine use. Neonates: Routine birth data, neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS) in severity and duration.

FINDINGS

There was somewhat greater retention in the buprenorphine group but significantly lowered use of additional opioids in the methadone group (P = 0.047).Neonates: There was earlier onset of NAS in neonates born to the methadone (mean 60 hours) than to the buprenorphine groups (mean 72 hours after last medication); 43% did not require NAS-treatment with short treatment duration in both groups (mean 5 days).

CONCLUSION

This preliminary study had limited power to detect differences but the trends observed suggest this kind of research is practicable and that further studies are warranted.