Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T03:37:53.807Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Using benchmarking to identify inter-centre differences in persistent ductus arteriosus treatment: can we improve outcome?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 April 2017

Esther J. S. Jansen ,
Koen P. Dijkman ,
Richard A. van Lingen ,
Willem B. de Vries ,
Daniel C. Vijlbrief ,
Willem P. de Boode  and
Peter Andriessen
Esther J. S. Jansen
Affiliation:
Department of Neonatology, Máxima Medical Centre, Veldhoven, The Netherlands
Koen P. Dijkman
Affiliation:
Department of Neonatology, Máxima Medical Centre, Veldhoven, The Netherlands
Richard A. van Lingen
Affiliation:
Department of Neonatology, Amalia Children’s Centre Isala, Zwolle, The Netherlands
Willem B. de Vries
Affiliation:
Department of Neonatology, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
Daniel C. Vijlbrief
Affiliation:
Department of Neonatology, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
Willem P. de Boode*
Affiliation:
Department of Neonatology, Radboudumc, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
Peter Andriessen
Affiliation:
Department of Neonatology, Máxima Medical Centre, Veldhoven, The Netherlands Faculty of Health, Medicine and Life Science, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands
*
Correspondence to: W. P. de Boode, Department of Neonatology, Radboudumc, PO Box 9101, 6500 HB Nijmegen, The Netherlands. Tel: +31 24 3611111; Fax: +31 24 361 64 28; E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objective

The aim of this study was to identify inter-centre differences in persistent ductus arteriosus treatment and their related outcomes.

Materials and methods

We carried out a retrospective, multicentre study including infants between 24+0 and 27+6 weeks of gestation in the period between 2010 and 2011. In all centres, echocardiography was used as the standard procedure to diagnose a patent ductus arteriosus and to document ductal closure.

Results

In total, 367 preterm infants were included. All four participating neonatal ICU had a comparable number of preterm infants; however, differences were observed in the incidence of treatment (33–63%), choice and dosing of medication (ibuprofen or indomethacin), number of pharmacological courses (1–4), and the need for surgical ligation after failure of pharmacological treatment (8–52%). Despite the differences in treatment, we found no difference in short-term morbidity between the centres. Adjusted mortality showed independent risk contribution of gestational age, birth weight, ductal ligation, and perinatal centre.

Conclusions

Using benchmarking as a tool identified inter-centre differences. In these four perinatal centres, the factors that explained the differences in patent ductus arteriosus treatment are quite complex. Timing, choice of medication, and dosing are probably important determinants for successful patent ductus arteriosus closure.

Keywords

Patent ductus arteriosusibuprofenindomethacinductal ligationnewbornpatent ductus arteriosus
Type
Original Articles
Information
Cardiology in the Young , Volume 27 , Issue 8 , October 2017 , pp. 1488 - 1496
Check for updates
Copyright
© Cambridge University Press 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Laughon, MM, Simmons, MA, Bose, CL. Patency of the ductus arteriosus in the premature infant: is it pathologic? Should it be treated? Curr Opin Pediatr 2004; 16: 146–151.Google Scholar
2. Harling, S, Hansen-Pupp, I, Baigi, A, Pesonen, E. Echocardiographic prediction of patent ductus arteriosus in need of intervention. Acta Paediatr 2001; 100: 231–235.Google Scholar
3. Sellmer, A, Bjerre, JV, Schmidt, MR, et al. Morbidity and mortality in preterm neonates with patent ductus arteriosus on day 3. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed 2013; 98: F505–F510.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4. Clyman, RI, Chorne, N. Patent ductus arteriosus: evidence for and against treatment. J Pediatr 2007; 150: 216–219.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
5. Clyman, RI, Couto, J, Murphy, GM. Patent ductus arteriosus: are current neonatal treatment options better or worse than no treatment at all? Semin Perinatol 2012; 36: 123–129.Google Scholar
6. Laughon, M, Bose, C, Clark, R. Treatment strategies to prevent or close a patent ductus arteriosus in preterm infants and outcomes. J Perinatol 2007; 27: 164–170.Google Scholar
7. Bose, CL, Laughon, MM. Patent ductus arteriosus: lack of evidence for common treatments. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed 2007; 92: F498–F502.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
8. Zonnenberg, I, de Waal, K. The definition of a haemodynamic significant duct in randomized controlled trials: a systematic literature review. Acta Paediatr 2012; 101: 247–251.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
9. Koch, J, Hensley, G, Roy, L, Brown, S, Ramaciotti, C, Rosenfeld, CR. Prevalence of spontaneous closure of the ductus arteriosus in neonates at a birth weight of 1000 grams or less. Pediatrics 2006; 117: 1113–1121.Google Scholar
10. Van Overmeire, B, Van de Broek, H, Van Laer, P, Weyler, J, Vanhaesebrouck, P. Early versus late indomethacin treatment for patent ductus arteriosus in premature infants with respiratory distress syndrome. J Pediatr 2001; 138: 205–211.Google Scholar
11. Stephens, BE, Gargus, RA, Walden, RV, et al. Fluid regimens in the first week of life may increase risk of patent ductus arteriosus in extremely low birth weight infants. J Perinatol 2008; 28: 132–138.Google ScholarPubMed
12. Rakza, T, Magnenant, E, Klosowski, S, Tourneux, P, Bachiri, A, Storme, L. Early hemodynamic consequences of patent ductus arteriosus in preterm infants with intrauterine growth restriction. J Pediatr 2007; 151: 624–628.Google Scholar
13. Hajj, H, Dagle, JM. Genetics of patent ductus arteriosus susceptibility and treatment. Semin Perinatol 2012; 36: 98–104.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
14. Jhaveri, N, Soll, RF, Clyman, RI. Feeding practices and patent ductus arteriosus ligation preferences—are they related? Am J Perinatol 2010; 27: 667–674.Google Scholar
15. de Laat, MW, Wiegerinck, MM, Walther, FJ, et al. Practice guideline ‘perinatal management of extremely preterm delivery’. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd 2010; 154: A2701.Google Scholar
16. Burstein, J, Papile, LA, Burstein, R. Intraventricular hemorrhage and hydrocephalus in premature newborns: a prospective study with CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1979; 132: 631–635.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
17. Bell, MJ, Ternberg, JL, Feigin, RD, et al. Neonatal necrotizing enterocolitis. Therapeutic decisions based upon clinical staging. Ann Surg 1978; 187: 1–7.Google Scholar
18. Kulkarni, A, Richards, J, Duffy, D. Survey of management of patent ductus arteriosus in neonatal units across England. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed 2013; 98: F465–F466.Google Scholar
19. Ohlsson, A, Walia, R, Shah, SS. Ibuprofen for the treatment of patent ductus arteriosus in preterm and/or low birth weight infants. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2013; 4: CD003481.Google Scholar
20. Andriessen, P, Struis, NC, Niemarkt, H, Oetomo, SB, Tanke, RB, Van Overmeire, B. Furosemide in preterm infants treated with indomethacin for patent ductus arteriosus. Acta Paediatr 2009; 98: 797–803.Google Scholar
21. Dani, C, Vangi, V, Bertini, G, et al. High-dose Ibuprofen for patent ductus arteriosus in extremely preterm infants: a randomized controlled study. Clin Pharmacol Ther 2012; 91: 590–596.Google Scholar
22. Hirt, D, Van Overmeire, B, Treluyer, JM, Langhendries, JP, Marguglio, A, Eisinger, MJ. An optimized Ibuprofen dosing scheme for preterm neonates with patent ductus arteriosus, based on a population pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic study. Br J Clin Pharmacol 2008; 65: 629–636.Google Scholar
23. Sosenko, IR, Fajardo, MF, Claure, N, Bancalari, E. Timing of patent ductus arteriosus treatment and respiratory outcome in premature infants: a double-blind randomized controlled trial. J Pediatr 2012; 160: 929–935.e1.Google Scholar
24. Chorne, N, Leonard, C, Piecuch, R, Clyman, RI. Patent ductus arteriosus and its treatment as risk factors for neonatal and neurodevelopmental morbidity. Pediatrics 2007; 119: 1165–1174.Google Scholar
25. Clyman, R, Cassady, G, Kirklin, JK, Collins, M, Philips, JB 3rd. The role of patent ductus arteriosus ligation in bronchopulmonary dysplasie: reexaming a randomized controlled trial. J Pediatr 2009; 154: 873–876.Google Scholar
26. Jhaveri, N, Moon-Grady, A, Clyman, RI. Early surgical ligation versus a conservative approach for management of patent ductus arteriosus that fails to close after indomethacin treatment. J Pediatr 2010; 157: 381–387.Google Scholar
27. Anderson, JG, Baer, RJ, Partridge, JC, et al. Survival and major morbidity of extremely preterm infants: a population-based study. Pediatrics 2016; 138: pii: e20154434. doi: 10.1542/peds.2015-4434.Google Scholar
28. Weisz, DE, More, K, McNamara, PJ, et al. PDA ligation and health outcomes: a meta-analysis. Pediatrics 2014; 133: e1024–e1046.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed