Posts

Gerard Martin

European workgroup creates recommendations for CCHD pulse oximetry screening

/in , , /by
Gerard Martin

Several experts, including Gerard R. Martin, M.D., recently published recommendations for the use and standardization of pulse oximetry screening for critical congenital heart defects in newborns.

The European Pulse Oximetry Screening Workgroup recently published recommendations for the use and standardization of pulse oximetry screening for critical congenital heart defects in newborns. Children’s National Medical Director of Global Services Gerard R. Martin, M.D., was among the experts that compiled the recommendations.

Approximately 1 in 500 babies is born with a critical congenital heart defect (CCHD). Because these conditions can cause serious, life-threatening symptoms, early detection and intervention is essential. Pulse oximetry screening (POS) – a method that measures oxygen saturation – is regarded as a simple, quick and reliable tool for early detection of CCHD, and was recommended for use in screening by the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American Heart Association in 2011.

In Europe, although POS is being used by an increasing number of hospitals, few countries have issued national guidelines recommending universal POS. To remedy this situation, neonatologists, experts in CCHD screening, and representatives from major scientific pediatric societies across Europe came together to create recommendations for the use and standardization of POS for early detection of CCHD across Europe.

Their recommendations, which were published in The Lancet, are as follows:

  • POS for critical congenital heart defects should be recommended for all European countries
  • POS should be done with new-generation equipment that is motion tolerant
  • Screening should occur after 6 hours of life or before discharge from the birthing centre (preferably within 24 hours after birth)
  • Screening should be done in two extremities: the right hand and either foot
  • Each country should consider the advantages and disadvantages of the two available protocols and use that which best suits their population

Newborn pulse oximetry screening: which algorithm is best?

/in , /by

Gerard Martin

There’s a consensus that Pulse oximetry screening (POS) is a proven way to find critical congenital heart defects. But, screenings, specifically the algorithm used, vary. Gerard R. Martin, M.D., Medical Director of Global Health at Children’s National Health System, and Andrew K. Ewer, MD, explore which algorithm is best in their just-published article in Pediatrics. Read more.

Lessons learned from newborn screening for critical congenital heart defects

/in , , /by

chd_screening

PDF Version

What’s Known

In 2011, screening for critical congenital heart defects (CCHD) became the second point-of-care newborn screening test added to the Recommended Uniform Screening Panel, and it has since been widely adopted. Heart defects are the primary targets for CCHD screening, which often require evaluation by echocardiogram. An original list of seven conditions represented the most common critical lesions which routinely present with hypoxemia for newborns. Endorsed by the American Academy of Pediatrics and four other professional medical societies, the CCHD screening using pulse oximetry is required by law in all but two states. Remaining challenges include national data collection and outcomes analyses at the population level.

What’s New

An expert panel including Gerard R. Martin, MD, a cardiologist at the Center for Translational Science at Children’s National Health System, reviewed current practices in newborn screening for CCHD and identified opportunities for improvement. The panel’s study expanded the list of core conditions to 12 to emphasize the importance of other potentially critical, yet treatable secondary conditions. Roughly 79 percent of “positive” screens for CCHD identify secondary conditions, such as sepsis and pulmonary diseases. The study found algorithm misinterpretation was common in states collecting outcomes data, emphasizing needs for proper training and quality-assurance feedback mechanisms. Public health surveillance varied dramatically, with nearly one-fifth of states neither actively collecting data nor planning to do so. Additional CCHD screening research in special settings like the NICU, out-of hospital settings, and areas with high altitude may result in adaptations to screening protocol. Future improvements to the current screening algorithm and analyses of the impact on CCHD outcomes will rely on further investment in a national data repository.

Questions for Future Research

Q: What will be the impact on present screening for CCHD on outcomes of non-CCHD secondary conditions?
Q: What is the optimal algorithm for CCHD based on screening and testing ease of use, costs, resource utilization, and sensitivity for different treatment settings?
Q: What will be the impact on present screening for CCHD on outcomes of non-CCHD secondary conditions?

Source: “Lessons Learned From Newborn Screening for Critical Congenital Heart Defects.” M.E. Oster, S.W. Aucott, J. Glidewell, J. Hackell, L. Kochilas, G.R. Martin, J. Phillippi, N.M.Pinto, A. Saarinen, M. Sontag, and A.R. Kemper. Published by Pediatrics May 2016.