While there are good data to describe changing trends in mortality and morbidity rates for preterm populations, there is very little information on the specific causes and pattern of death in terms of age of vulnerability. It is well established that mortality increases with decreasing gestational age but there are limited data on the specific causes that account for this increased mortality. The aim of this study was to establish the common causes of hospital mortality in a regional preterm population admitted to a neonatal intensive care unit (NICU). Retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data of the Neonatal Intensive Care Units' (NICUS) Data Collection of all 10 NICUs in the region. Infants <32 weeks gestation without major congenital anomalies admitted from 2007 to 2011 were included. Three authors reviewed all cases to agree upon the immediate cause of death. There were 345 (7.7%) deaths out of 4454 infants. The most common cause of death across all gestational groups was major IVH (cause-specific mortality rate [CMR] 22 per 1000 infants), followed by acute respiratory illnesses [ARI] (CMR 21 per 1000 infants) and sepsis (CMR 12 per 1000 infants). The most common cause of death was different in each gestational group (22–25 weeks [ARI], 26–28 weeks [IVH] and 29–31 weeks [perinatal asphyxia]). Pregnancy induced hypertension, antenatal steroids and chorioamnionitis were all associated with changes in CMRs. Deaths due to ARI or major IVH were more likely to occur at an earlier age (median [quartiles] 1.4 [0.3–4.4] and 3.6 [1.9–6.6] days respectively) in comparison to NEC and miscellaneous causes (25.2 [15.4–37.3] and 25.8 [3.2–68.9] days respectively). Major IVH and ARI were the most common causes of hospital mortality in this extreme to very preterm population. Perinatal factors have a significant impact on cause-specific mortality. The varying timing of death provides insight into the prolonged vulnerability for diseases such as necrotising enterocolitis in our preterm population.

Background: The first consensus standardised neonatal parenteral nutrition formulations were implemented in many neonatal units in Australia in 2012. The current update involving 49 units from Australia, New Zealand, Singapore, Malaysia and India was conducted between September 2015 and December 2017 with the aim to review and update the 2012 formulations and guidelines. Methods: A systematic review of available evidence for each parenteral nutrient was undertaken and new standardised formulations and guidelines were developed. Results: Five existing preterm Amino acid-Dextrose formulations have been modified and two new concentrated Amino acid-Dextrose formulations added to optimise amino acid and nutrient intake according to gestation. Organic phosphate has replaced inorganic phosphate allowing for an increase in calcium and phosphate content, and acetate reduced. Lipid emulsions are unchanged, with both SMOFlipid (Fresenius Kabi, Australia) and ClinOleic (Baxter Healthcare, Australia) preparations included. The physicochemical compatibility and stability of all formulations have been tested and confirmed. Guidelines to standardise the parenteral nutrition clinical practice across facilities have also been developed. Conclusions: The 2017 PN formulations and guidelines developed by the 2017 Neonatal Parenteral Nutrition Consensus Group offer concise and practical instructions to clinicians on how to implement current and up-to-date evidence based PN to the NICU population.

Lipid emulsions (LE) are routinely administered as part of parenteral nutrition in neonates. There is a wide variation in clinical practice of plasma triglyceride monitoring during LE therapy. Our aim was to evaluate the incidence of hypertriglyceridaemia (Plasma triglyceride > 2.8 mmol/L) and its association with mortality and major morbidities in extremely preterm infants on parenteral nutrition. A retrospective review of 195 infants < 29 weeks gestation. Lipid emulsion was commenced at 1 g/kg/day soon after birth and increased by 1 g/kg daily up to 3 g/kg/day and continued until the infant was on at least 120 ml/kg/day of enteral feeds. Plasma triglyceride concentrations were measured at each increment and the lipid emulsion dosage was adjusted to keep plasma triglyceride concentrations ≤2.8 mmol/L. Hypertriglyceridemia was noted in 38 neonates (32.5% in 23–25 weeks and 16.1% in 26–28 weeks). Severe hypertriglyceridemia (> 4.5 mmol/L) was noted in 11 infants (10.0% in 23–25 weeks and 4.5% in 26–28 weeks). Hypertriglyceridemia was associated with an increase in mortality (unadjusted OR 3.5; 95% CI 1.13–10.76; 0.033) and severe retinopathy of prematurity (unadjusted OR 4.06; 95% CI 1.73–9.59; 0.002) on univariate analysis. However, this association became non-significant in multivariate analysis with adjustment for gestation and birthweight. Hypertriglyceridemia is common in extremely preterm infants receiving parenteral lipid emulsions. Regular monitoring and prompt adjustment of lipid intake in the presence of hypertriglyceridemia, minimising the length of exposure to hypertriglyceridemia, may mitigate potential consequences.

Neonatal drug information (DI) is essential for safe and effective pharmacotherapy in (pre)term neonates. Such information is usually absent from drug labels, making formularies a crucial part of the neonatal clinician’s toolbox. Several formularies exist worldwide, but they have never been fully mapped or compared for content, structure and workflow. The objective of this review was to identify neonatal formularies, explore (dis)similarities, and raise awareness of their existence. Neonatal formularies were identified through self-acquaintance, experts and structured search. A questionnaire was sent to all identified formularies to provide details on formulary function. An original extraction tool was employed to collect DI from the formularies on the 10 most commonly used drugs in pre(term) neonates. Eight different neonatal formularies were identified worldwide (Europe, USA, Australia-New Zealand, Middle East). Six responded to the questionnaire and were compared for structure and content. Each formulary has its own workflow, monograph template and style, and update routine. Focus on certain aspects of DI also varies, as well as the type of initiative and funding. Clinicians should be aware of the various formularies available and their differences in characteristics and content to use them properly for the benefit of their patients.