Future Newborns with Opioid-Induced Neonatal Abstinence Syndrome (NAS) Could Be Assessed with the Genetic Addiction Risk Severity (GARS) Test and Potentially Treated Using Precision Amino-Acid Enkephalinase Inhibition Therapy (KB220) as a Frontline Modality Instead of Potent Opioids

Eat, Sleep, Console model for neonatal opioid withdrawal syndrome: a meta-analysis

Background

The rising incidence of drug abuse among pregnant women has rendered neonatal opioid withdrawal syndrome a significant global health concern.

Methods

Databases including PubMed, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, Embase, Elton B. Stephens. Company (EBSCO), China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), and Wanfang were searched for comparative studies of the Eat, Sleep, Console model vs. traditional assessment tools for neonatal opioid withdrawal syndrome. Two reviewers conducted literature searches, screened according to the inclusion criteria, extracted data, and independently verified accuracy. All meta-analyses were conducted using Review Manager Version 5.4.

Results

In total, 18 studies involving 4,639 neonates were included in the meta-analysis. The Eat, Sleep, Console model demonstrated superior outcomes in assessing neonatal opioid withdrawal syndrome, significantly reducing the need for pharmacological treatment [risk ratio = 0.44, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.34-0.56, P < 0.001], decreasing the length of hospital stay [standard mean difference (SMD) = -2.10, 95% CI = -3.43 to -0.78, P = 0.002], and shortening the duration of opioid treatment (SMD = -1.33, 95% CI = -2.22 to -0.45, P = 0.003) compared to the Finnegan Neonatal Abstinence Scoring System.

Conclusions

The Eat, Sleep, Console model is more effective than the Finnegan Neonatal Abstinence Scoring System in improving the assessment and management of neonatal opioid withdrawal syndrome.

Are We Getting High Cause the Thrill is Gone?

In the USA alone, opioid use disorder (OUD) affects approximately 27 million people. While the number of prescriptions may be declining due to increased CDC guidance and prescriber education, fatalities due to fentanyl-laced street heroin are still rising. Our laboratory has extended the overall concept of both substance and non-substance addictive behaviors, calling it "Reward Deficiency Syndrome (RDS)." Who are its victims, and how do we get this unwanted disorder? Is RDS caused by genes (Nature), environment (Neuro-epigenetics, Nurture), or both? Recent research identifies resting-state functional connectivity in the brain reward circuitry as a crucial factor. Analogously, it is of importance to acknowledge that the cumulative discharge of dopamine, governed by the nucleus accumbens (NAc) and modulated by an array of additional neurotransmitters, constitutes a cornerstone of an individual's overall well-being. Neuroimaging reveals that high-risk individuals exhibit a blunted response to stimuli, potentially due to DNA polymorphisms or epigenetic alterations. This discovery has given rise to the idea of a diminished 'thrill,' though we must consider whether this 'thrill' may have been absent from birth due to high-risk genetic predispositions for addiction. This article reviews this issue and suggests the general concept of the importance of "induction of dopamine homeostasis." We suggest coupling a validated genetic assessment (e.g., GARS) with pro-dopamine regulation (KB220) as one possible frontline modality in place of prescribing potent addictive opioids for OUD except for short time harm reduction. Could gene editing offer a 'cure' for this undesirable genetic modification at birth, influenced by the environment and carried over generations, leading to impaired dopamine and other neurotransmitter imbalances, as seen in RDS? Through dedicated global scientific exploration, we hope for a future where individuals are liberated from pain and disease, achieving an optimal state of well-being akin to the proverbial 'Garden of Eden'.