Fluid restriction in management of patent ductus arteriosus in Italy: a nationwide survey.

We aimed at establishing the state of the art in fluid restriction practice in our national setting and providing a foundation for future research efforts. A prospective cross-sectional survey was conducted among all 114 Italian Neonatal Units in order to address conservative management of patent ductus arteriosus (PDA) in preterm infants below 29 weeks' gestational age (GA), with specific regard to fluid restriction. Response rate was 80%. Conservative measures for PDA management are provided in the majority of NICUs and 80% of centers reduce fluid intake in neonates with PDA. No relationship can be found among pharmacologically or surgically treated patients per year and the approach to fluid restriction. The minimum intake administered at regimen when fluid restriction is applied is associated to the ratio between the maximum number of neonates managed pharmacologically and number of admitted < 29 weeks' GA newborns.

conclusionOur survey shows an extreme variability among centers in terms of use of fluid restriction as a prophylactic tool but also in terms of its use (both opportunity and modality) when a hemodynamically significant PDA is diagnosed. This variability, that can be also found in randomized trials and observational studies, suggests that further evidence is needed to better understand its potential beneficial effects and its potential harms such as dehydration, hypotension, decreased end-organ perfusion, and reduced caloric intake. WHAT IS KNOWN: • The lack of demonstrable improvement following the treatment of patent ductus arteriosus has recently paved the way to a more conservative approach. • Fluid restriction is the most commonly applied conservative treatment of PDA. WHAT IS NEW: • Among Italian NICUs an extreme variability in terms of indications, timing and modalities of application of Fluid restriction can be found. • This variability reflects the lack of standardization of this practice and the contrasting evidence on its efficacy.