Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://www.arca.fiocruz.br/handle/icict/9759
Type
ArticleCopyright
Restricted access
Embargo date
2030-12-31
Collections
- IFF - Artigos de Periódicos [1289]
Metadata
Show full item record
RETINOPATHY OF PREMATURITY IN 7 NEONATAL UNITS IN RIO DE JANEIRO: SCREENING CRITERIA AND WORKLOAD IMPLICATIONS
Author
Affilliation
Fundação Oswaldo Cruz. Instituto Fernandes Figueira. Departamento de Neonatologia. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brasil.
Fundação Oswaldo Cruz. Instituto Fernandes Figueira. Departamento de Neonatologia. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brasil.
Moorfields Eye Hospital. Research, and Development. London, England.
University of Otago. Christchurch School of Medicine and Health Sciences. Department of Paediatrics. Christchurch, New Zealand.
International Centre for Eye Health. London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine. London, England.
Fundação Oswaldo Cruz. Instituto Fernandes Figueira. Departamento de Neonatologia. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brasil.
Moorfields Eye Hospital. Research, and Development. London, England.
University of Otago. Christchurch School of Medicine and Health Sciences. Department of Paediatrics. Christchurch, New Zealand.
International Centre for Eye Health. London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine. London, England.
Abstract
Objectives: The goals were to determine optimal screening criteria for retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) in 7 neonatal units in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, and to explore the workload implications of applying different criteria. Methods: Infants with birth weights of < or = 2000 g or gestational age of <37 weeks were examined by 3 ophthalmologists in 7 of the largest units in Rio de Janeiro, during a 34-month period. ROP was classified by using the international classification, and laser treatment was given to infants developing type 1 ROP. Results: A total of 3437 (87%) of 3953 eligible infants were examined, of whom 124 (3.6% [range: 2.1%-7.8%]) were treated. Eleven infants were treated for aggressive posterior ROP. Appropriate screening criteria for the 2 NICUs with high survival rates (ie, > or =80% among infants with birth weights of <1500 g) would be < or =1500 g or <32 weeks. For NICUs with low survival rates (ie, <80%), appropriate criteria would be < or =1500 g or < or =35 weeks. UK, US, and previous Brazilian criteria would all miss infants needing treatment. Conclusions: ROP programs in Brazil should use the wider criteria of < or =1500 g or < or =35 weeks until further evidence-based criteria become available, although this would mean a slight increase in workload across the city, compared with use of the narrower criteria in the better units. Whether survival rates can be used as a proxy to indicate screening criteria requires further investigation.
Share