Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2017 Feb;37(2):188-193.
doi: 10.1038/jp.2016.196. Epub 2016 Oct 20.

Effect of prophylactic indomethacin administration and early feeding on spontaneous intestinal perforation in extremely low-birth-weight infants

Affiliations

Effect of prophylactic indomethacin administration and early feeding on spontaneous intestinal perforation in extremely low-birth-weight infants

M Stavel et al. J Perinatol. 2017 Feb.

Abstract

Objective: To determine the effect of concomitant administration of prophylactic indomethacin and early enteral feeds on the risk of spontaneous intestinal perforation (SIP) in extremely low-birth-weight (ELBW) infants, and to describe the variation in prophylactic indomethacin use in Canada.

Study design: A retrospective cohort study of 4268 ELBW infants born at <30 weeks' gestation admitted to Canadian neonatal units between 2010 and 2014 was conducted. Prophylactic indomethacin (I+ or I-, administered within 24 h) and early feeding (E+ or E-, initiated in the first 2 days) exposures were studied concurrently and independently. The primary outcomes were SIP and death before discharge. Adjusted odds ratios (aORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated.

Results: Compared with the I-/E+ reference group (n=1829), infants in I+/E+ (n=285; aOR 2.92, 95% CI 1.41 to 6.08) and I+/E- (n=213; aOR 2.84, 95% CI 1.35 to 5.98) groups had higher odds of SIP, whereas those in the I-/E- group had similar odds (n=1941; aOR 1.37, 95% CI 0.88 to 2.14). Odds of SIP were higher in the indomethacin exposed group (I+) compared with the unexposed (I-) group when controlled for early feeding (aOR 2.43, 95% CI 1.41 to 4.19), but not in the early feeding group when controlled for indomethacin. The use of prophylactic indomethacin ranged from 0% usage in 13 sites to 78% use in one site.

Conclusion: Prophylactic indomethacin was associated with increased odds of SIP independently from early feeding in this cohort; however, early enteral feeding was not associated with SIP. Marked variation in the use of prophylactic indomethacin was identified.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. J Pediatr. 2007 Jan;150(1):46-50.e2 - PubMed
    1. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010 Jul 07;(7):CD000174 - PubMed
    1. J Pediatr. 1986 Feb;108(2):327-8 - PubMed
    1. Pediatrics. 2004 Dec;114(6):1649-57 - PubMed
    1. J Pediatr. 2001 Aug;139(2):220-6 - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources