Cargando…
Utility of pulse-oximetry screening in newborns with nonductus-dependent cyanotic congenital heart defects: A reason to alarm?
OBJECTIVES: We aimed to compare the performance of pulse-oximetry screening in detecting nonductus-dependent cyanotic congenital heart defects (CCHDs). METHODS: In a prospective cross-sectional study, we recorded post ductal saturation of neonates (<48 h old) born at a community hospital in north...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Wolters Kluwer - Medknow
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9280103/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35847403 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/apc.apc_9_22 |
_version_ | 1784746561402568704 |
---|---|
author | Arvind, Balaji Saxena, Anita Ramakrishnan, Sivasubramanian |
author_facet | Arvind, Balaji Saxena, Anita Ramakrishnan, Sivasubramanian |
author_sort | Arvind, Balaji |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVES: We aimed to compare the performance of pulse-oximetry screening in detecting nonductus-dependent cyanotic congenital heart defects (CCHDs). METHODS: In a prospective cross-sectional study, we recorded post ductal saturation of neonates (<48 h old) born at a community hospital in northern India. Subsequently, all underwent clinical examination and echocardiogram by a trained cardiologist. A saturation <95% was considered a “failed” screen. RESULTS: Ten neonates were identified to have nonductus-dependent CCHD on echocardiogram, five of whom had passed pulse-oximetry screen. This translated to a sensitivity of 50% (95% confidence interval [CI] 23.7%–76.3%) and a positive predictive value of 0.08 (95% CI 0.03–0.2), both of which were significantly less compared to that in ductus-dependent congenital heart defect. CONCLUSIONS: Up to half of the nonductus-dependent CCHD may be missed if screened only using pulse oximetry. Parents should not be reassured regarding the absence of CCHD only based on a “pass” in pulse-oximetry screening. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9280103 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Wolters Kluwer - Medknow |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-92801032022-07-15 Utility of pulse-oximetry screening in newborns with nonductus-dependent cyanotic congenital heart defects: A reason to alarm? Arvind, Balaji Saxena, Anita Ramakrishnan, Sivasubramanian Ann Pediatr Cardiol Brief Communication OBJECTIVES: We aimed to compare the performance of pulse-oximetry screening in detecting nonductus-dependent cyanotic congenital heart defects (CCHDs). METHODS: In a prospective cross-sectional study, we recorded post ductal saturation of neonates (<48 h old) born at a community hospital in northern India. Subsequently, all underwent clinical examination and echocardiogram by a trained cardiologist. A saturation <95% was considered a “failed” screen. RESULTS: Ten neonates were identified to have nonductus-dependent CCHD on echocardiogram, five of whom had passed pulse-oximetry screen. This translated to a sensitivity of 50% (95% confidence interval [CI] 23.7%–76.3%) and a positive predictive value of 0.08 (95% CI 0.03–0.2), both of which were significantly less compared to that in ductus-dependent congenital heart defect. CONCLUSIONS: Up to half of the nonductus-dependent CCHD may be missed if screened only using pulse oximetry. Parents should not be reassured regarding the absence of CCHD only based on a “pass” in pulse-oximetry screening. Wolters Kluwer - Medknow 2022 2022-06-14 /pmc/articles/PMC9280103/ /pubmed/35847403 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/apc.apc_9_22 Text en Copyright: © 2022 Annals of Pediatric Cardiology https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/This is an open access journal, and articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as appropriate credit is given and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms. |
spellingShingle | Brief Communication Arvind, Balaji Saxena, Anita Ramakrishnan, Sivasubramanian Utility of pulse-oximetry screening in newborns with nonductus-dependent cyanotic congenital heart defects: A reason to alarm? |
title | Utility of pulse-oximetry screening in newborns with nonductus-dependent cyanotic congenital heart defects: A reason to alarm? |
title_full | Utility of pulse-oximetry screening in newborns with nonductus-dependent cyanotic congenital heart defects: A reason to alarm? |
title_fullStr | Utility of pulse-oximetry screening in newborns with nonductus-dependent cyanotic congenital heart defects: A reason to alarm? |
title_full_unstemmed | Utility of pulse-oximetry screening in newborns with nonductus-dependent cyanotic congenital heart defects: A reason to alarm? |
title_short | Utility of pulse-oximetry screening in newborns with nonductus-dependent cyanotic congenital heart defects: A reason to alarm? |
title_sort | utility of pulse-oximetry screening in newborns with nonductus-dependent cyanotic congenital heart defects: a reason to alarm? |
topic | Brief Communication |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9280103/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35847403 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/apc.apc_9_22 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT arvindbalaji utilityofpulseoximetryscreeninginnewbornswithnonductusdependentcyanoticcongenitalheartdefectsareasontoalarm AT saxenaanita utilityofpulseoximetryscreeninginnewbornswithnonductusdependentcyanoticcongenitalheartdefectsareasontoalarm AT ramakrishnansivasubramanian utilityofpulseoximetryscreeninginnewbornswithnonductusdependentcyanoticcongenitalheartdefectsareasontoalarm |