RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Thrombosis in neonates is commonly a central venous access device (CVAD) associated complication. Furthermore, a patent foramen ovale (PFO) is frequently seen in preterm infants. Even though a coincidence of both is not unusual, detaching of the thrombus and organisation of an aortic embolism has not been described until now. Treatment recommendations of CVAD-associated thrombosis in neonates do not consider frequently seen complications of preterm infants e.g. intraventricular haemorrhage. This is the first case of a very preterm infant with pre-existing intraventricular haemorrhage, who developed a CVAD-associated thrombosis and thromboembolic complications. CASE PRESENTATION: The authors report on a very preterm girl with a pre-existing intraventricular haemorrhage and a CVAD-associated thrombus that, after removal of the CVAD, led to assumed pulmonary embolism and to an extended aortic embolism with consequent cerebral stroke. The girl was treated with unfractionated heparin (UFH) for about 50 days. During the further in-hospital stay the girl developed a mild bronchopulmonary dysplasia. Follow-up revealed clinical signs of cerebral palsy. CONCLUSION: Even though preterm infants are often diagnosed with a PFO which constitutes the risk for paradoxical embolism, such complications do not occur frequently due to the physiological heart pressure proportion. Nevertheless, it is important to monitor vital parameters and cerebral perfusion after removing a CVAD with confirmed associated thrombosis, because thromboembolic complications are possible. If practicable, patients with a confirmed CVAD-associated thrombosis should be anticoagulated before removing the CVAD. However, in our patient it was rational to remove the CVAD without prior anticoagulation due to the pre-existing intraventricular haemorrhage. There are various treatment recommendations for thrombosis or embolism in infants. However, there are no clear recommendations in very preterm infants with a high risk of cerebral bleeding respectively a pre-existing intraventricular haemorrhage. We decided to treat our patient with unfractionated heparin until the affected vessels were recanalised. Finally, it remains a case-by-case decision how to treat CVAD-associated thrombosis and consequent embolism depending on the patient's medical history.
Asunto(s)
Enfermedades de la Aorta/etiología , Catéteres Venosos Centrales/efectos adversos , Remoción de Dispositivos/efectos adversos , Embolia Paradójica/etiología , Enfermedades del Prematuro/etiología , Trombosis de la Vena/etiología , Enfermedades de la Aorta/diagnóstico , Hemorragia Cerebral/complicaciones , Embolia Paradójica/diagnóstico , Femenino , Humanos , Recién Nacido , Recien Nacido Prematuro , Enfermedades del Prematuro/diagnóstico , Embolia Pulmonar/diagnóstico , Embolia Pulmonar/etiología , Accidente Cerebrovascular/diagnóstico , Accidente Cerebrovascular/etiología , Trombosis de la Vena/diagnósticoRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To compare the duration of parenteral nutrition, growth, and morbidity in extremely premature infants fed exclusive diets of either bovine milk-based preterm formula (BOV) or donor human milk and human milk-based human milk fortifier (HUM), in a randomized trial of formula vs human milk. STUDY DESIGN: Multicenter randomized controlled trial. The authors studied extremely preterm infants whose mothers did not provide their milk. Infants were fed either BOV or an exclusive human milk diet of pasteurized donor human milk and HUM. The major outcome was duration of parenteral nutrition. Secondary outcomes were growth, respiratory support, and necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC). RESULTS: Birth weight (983 vs 996 g) and gestational age (27.5 vs 27.7 wk), in BOV and HUM, respectively, were similar. There was a significant difference in median parenteral nutrition days: 36 vs 27, in BOV vs HUM, respectively (P = .04). The incidence of NEC in BOV was 21% (5 cases) vs 3% in HUM (1 case), P = .08; surgical NEC was significantly higher in BOV (4 cases) than HUM (0 cases), P = .04. CONCLUSIONS: In extremely preterm infants given exclusive diets of preterm formula vs human milk, there was a significantly greater duration of parenteral nutrition and higher rate of surgical NEC in infants receiving preterm formula. This trial supports the use of an exclusive human milk diet to nourish extremely preterm infants in the neonatal intensive care unit.
Asunto(s)
Lactancia Materna , Alimentos Formulados , Fórmulas Infantiles , Recien Nacido Extremadamente Prematuro , Animales , Bovinos , Método Doble Ciego , Enterocolitis Necrotizante/epidemiología , Femenino , Humanos , Recién Nacido , Masculino , Leche , Nutrición Parenteral/estadística & datos numéricosRESUMEN
Gastric lactobezoar, a pathological conglomeration of milk and mucus in the stomach of milk-fed infants often causing gastric outlet obstruction, is a rarely reported disorder (96 cases since its first description in 1959). While most patients were described 1975-1985 only 26 children have been published since 1986. Clinically, gastric lactobezoars frequently manifest as acute abdomen with abdominal distension (61.0% of 96 patients), vomiting (54.2%), diarrhea (21.9%), and/or a palpable abdominal mass (19.8%). Respiratory (23.0%) and cardiocirculatory (16.7%) symptoms are not uncommon. The pathogenesis of lactobezoar formation is multifactorial: exogenous influences such as high casein content (54.2%), medium chain triglycerides (54.2%) or enhanced caloric density (65.6%) of infant milk as well as endogenous factors including immature gastrointestinal functions (66.0%), dehydration (27.5%) and many other mechanisms have been suggested. Diagnosis is easy if the potential presence of a gastric lactobezoar is thought of, and is based on a history of inappropriate milk feeding, signs of acute abdomen and characteristic features of diagnostic imaging. Previously, plain and/or air-, clear fluid- or opaque contrast medium radiography techniques were used to demonstrate a mass free-floating in the lumen of the stomach. This feature differentiates a gastric lactobezoar from intussusception or an abdominal neoplasm. Currently, abdominal ultrasound, showing highly echogenic intrabezoaric air trapping, is the diagnostic method of choice. However, identifying a gastric lactobezoar requires an investigator experienced in gastrointestinal problems of infancy as can be appreciated from the results of our review which show that in not even a single patient gastric lactobezoar was initially considered as a possible differential diagnosis. Furthermore, in over 30% of plain radiographs reported, diagnosis was initially missed although a lactobezoar was clearly demonstrable on repeat evaluation of the same X-ray films. Enhanced diagnostic sensitivity would be most rewarding since management consisting of cessation of oral feedings combined with administration of intravenous fluids and gastric lavage is easy and resolves over 85% of gastric lactobezoars. In conclusion, gastric lactobezoar is a disorder of unknown prevalence and is nowadays very rarely published, possibly because of inadequate diagnostic sensitivity and/or not yet identified but beneficial modifications of patient management.