Harris, Malinda N.

BACKGROUND:Inhaled nitric oxide (iNO) therapy is an off-label medication in infants <34 weeks’ gestational age. In 2011, the National Institutes of Health released a statement discouraging routine iNO use in premature infants. The objective of this study was to describe utilization patterns of iNO in American NICUs in the years surrounding the release of the National Institutes of Health statement. We hypothesized that iNO prescription rates in premature infants have remained unchanged since 2011.METHODS:The Pediatrix Medical Group Clinical Data Warehouse was queried for the years 2009–2013 to describe first exposure iNO use among all admitted neonates stratified by gestational age.RESULTS:Between 2009 and 2013, the rate of iNO utilization in 23- to 29-week neonates increased from 5.03% to 6.19%, a relative increase of 23% (confidence interval: 8%–40%; P = .003). Of all neonates who received iNO therapy in 2013, nearly half were <34 weeks’ gestation, with these infants accounting for more than half of all first exposure iNO days each year of the study period.CONCLUSIONS:The rates of off-label iNO use in preterm infants continue to rise despite evidence revealing no clear benefit in this population. This pattern of iNO prescription is not benign and comes with economic consequences.

This report describes a toddler who presented to the emergency department with reported leg weakness and a petechial rash who ultimately was diagnosed with severe ascorbic acid deficiency (scurvy) due to restricted dietary intake. The diagnosis was delayed, and this report highlights the role of a detailed dietary history as part of the diagnostic process.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Previous studies suggest that former late preterm infants are at increased risk for learning and behavioral problems compared with term infants. These studies have primarily used referred clinical samples of children followed only until early school age. Our objective was to determine the cumulative incidence of attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and learning disabilities (LD) in former late preterm versus term infants in a population-based birth cohort. METHODS: Subjects included all children born 1976 to 1982 in Rochester, MN who remained in the community after 5 years. This study focused on the comparison of subjects in 2 subgroups, late preterm (34 to <37 weeks) and term (37 to <42 weeks). School and medical records were available to identify individuals who met research criteria for ADHD and LD in reading, written language, and math. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate the cumulative incidence of each condition by 19 years of age. Cox models were fit to evaluate the association between gestational age group and condition, after adjusting for maternal education and perinatal complications. RESULTS: We found no statistically significant differences in the cumulative incidence of ADHD or LD between the late preterm (N = 256) versus term (N = 4419) groups: ADHD (cumulative incidence by age 19 years, 7.7% vs 7.2%; P = .84); reading LD (14.2% vs 13.1%; P = .57); written language LD (13.5% vs 15.7%; P = .36), and math LD (16.1% vs 15.5%; P = .89). CONCLUSIONS: These data from a population-based birth cohort indicate that former late preterm infants have similar rates of LD and ADHD as term infants.