Intensive care for extreme prematurity--moving beyond gestational age.

BACKGROUND: Decisions regarding whether to administer intensive care to extremely premature infants are often based on gestational age alone. However, other factors also affect the prognosis for these patients. METHODS: We prospectively studied a cohort of 4446 infants born at 22 to 25 weeks' gestation (determined on the basis of the best obstetrical estimate) in the Neonatal Research Network of the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development to relate risk factors assessable at or before birth to the likelihood of survival, survival without profound neurodevelopmental impairment, and survival without neurodevelopmental impairment at a corrected age of 18 to 22 months. RESULTS: Among study infants, 3702 (83%) received intensive care in the form of mechanical ventilation. Among the 4192 study infants (94%) for whom outcomes were determined at 18 to 22 months, 49% died, 61% died or had profound impairment, and 73% died or had impairment. In multivariable analyses of infants who received intensive care, exposure to antenatal corticosteroids, female sex, singleton birth, and higher birth weight (per each 100-g increment) were each associated with reductions in the risk of death and the risk of death or profound or any neurodevelopmental impairment; these reductions were similar to those associated with a 1-week increase in gestational age. At the same estimated likelihood of a favorable outcome, girls were less likely than boys to receive intensive care. The outcomes for infants who underwent ventilation were better predicted with the use of the above factors than with use of gestational age alone. CONCLUSIONS: The likelihood of a favorable outcome with intensive care can be better estimated by consideration of four factors in addition to gestational age: sex, exposure or nonexposure to antenatal corticosteroids, whether single or multiple birth, and birth weight. (ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT00063063 [ClinicalTrials.gov] and NCT00009633 [ClinicalTrials.gov].).

Maternal and neonatal outcomes by labor onset type and gestational age.

OBJECTIVE: We sought to determine maternal and neonatal outcomes by labor onset type and gestational age. STUDY DESIGN: We used electronic medical records data from 10 US institutions in the Consortium on Safe Labor on 115,528 deliveries from 2002 through 2008. Deliveries were divided by labor onset type (spontaneous, elective induction, indicated induction, unlabored cesarean). Neonatal and maternal outcomes were calculated by labor onset type and gestational age. RESULTS: Neonatal intensive care unit admissions and sepsis improved with each week of gestational age until 39 weeks (P < .001). After adjusting for complications, elective induction of labor was associated with a lower risk of ventilator use (odds ratio [OR], 0.38; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.28-0.53), sepsis (OR, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.26-0.49), and neonatal intensive care unit admissions (OR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.48-0.57) compared to spontaneous labor. The relative risk of hysterectomy at term was 3.21 (95% CI, 1.08-9.54) with elective induction, 1.16 (95% CI, 0.24-5.58) with indicated induction, and 6.57 (95% CI, 1.78-24.30) with cesarean without labor compared to spontaneous labor. CONCLUSION: Some neonatal outcomes improved until 39 weeks. Babies born with elective induction are associated with better neonatal outcomes compared to spontaneous labor. Elective induction may be associated with an increased hysterectomy risk.

New algorithms for automated phylogenetic reconstruction using artificial intelligence and data mining techniques

Academic and industrial research in the late 90s have brought about an exponential explosion of DNA sequence data. Automated expert systems are being created to help biologists to extract patterns, trends and links from this ever-deepening ocean of information. Two such systems aimed on retrieving and subsequently utilizing phylogenetically relevant information have been developed in this dissertation, the major objective of which was to automate the often difficult and confusing phylogenetic reconstruction process. ^ Popular phylogenetic reconstruction methods, such as distance-based methods, attempt to find an optimal tree topology (that reflects the relationships among related sequences and their evolutionary history) by searching through the topology space. Various compromises between the fast (but incomplete) and exhaustive (but computationally prohibitive) search heuristics have been suggested. An intelligent compromise algorithm that relies on a flexible “beam” search principle from the Artificial Intelligence domain and uses the pre-computed local topology reliability information to adjust the beam search space continuously is described in the second chapter of this dissertation. ^ However, sometimes even a (virtually) complete distance-based method is inferior to the significantly more elaborate (and computationally expensive) maximum likelihood (ML) method. In fact, depending on the nature of the sequence data in question either method might prove to be superior. Therefore, it is difficult (even for an expert) to tell a priori which phylogenetic reconstruction method—distance-based, ML or maybe maximum parsimony (MP)—should be chosen for any particular data set. ^ A number of factors, often hidden, influence the performance of a method. For example, it is generally understood that for a phylogenetically “difficult” data set more sophisticated methods (e.g., ML) tend to be more effective and thus should be chosen. However, it is the interplay of many factors that one needs to consider in order to avoid choosing an inferior method (potentially a costly mistake, both in terms of computational expenses and in terms of reconstruction accuracy.) ^ Chapter III of this dissertation details a phylogenetic reconstruction expert system that selects a superior proper method automatically. It uses a classifier (a Decision Tree-inducing algorithm) to map a new data set to the proper phylogenetic reconstruction method. ^