4.5 Article

Trends in Survival and Incidence of Bronchopulmonary Dysplasia in Extremely Preterm Infants at 23-26 Weeks Gestation

Journal

JOURNAL OF KOREAN MEDICAL SCIENCE
Volume 31, Issue 3, Pages 423-429

Publisher

KOREAN ACAD MEDICAL SCIENCES
DOI: 10.3346/jkms.2016.31.3.423

Keywords

Bronchopulmonary Dysplasia; Continuous Positive Airway Pressure; Extremely Premature Infants; Survival Rate

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The aim of this study was to investigate the relationship between survival and incidence of bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD) in extremely premature infants, and identify clinical factors responsible for this association. Medical records of 350 infants at 23-26 weeks gestation from 2000 to 2005 (period I, n = 137) and 2006 to 2010 (period II, n = 213) were retrospectively reviewed. The infants were stratified into 23-24 and 25-26 weeks gestation, and the survival, BPD incidence, and clinical characteristics were analyzed. BPD was defined as oxygen dependency at 36 weeks postmenstrual age. The overall survival rate was significantly improved in period II compared to period I (80.3% vs. 70.0%, respectively; P = 0.028), especially in infants at 23-24 weeks gestation (73.9% vs. 47.4%, respectively; P = 0.001). The BPD incidence in survivors during period II (55.0%) was significantly decreased compared to period I (67.7%; P 0.042), especially at 25-26 weeks gestation (41.7% vs. 62.30/o, respectively; P= 0.008). Significantly improved survival at 23-24 weeks gestation was associated with a higher antenatal steroid use and an improved 5-minute Apgar score. A significant decrease in BPD incidence at 25-26 weeks gestation was associated with early extubation, prolonged use of less invasive continuous positive airway pressure, and reduced supplemental oxygen. Improved perinatal and neonatal care can simultaneously lead to improved survival and decreased BPD incidence in extremely premature infants.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available