Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Neuropsychological Follow-up After Neonatal ECMO.

Pediatrics 2016 November
OBJECTIVE: To assess the longitudinal development of intelligence and its relation to school performance in a nationwide cohort of neonatal extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) survivors and evaluate predictors of outcome at 8 years of age.

METHODS: Repeated measurements assessed intelligence of neonatal ECMO survivors at 2, 5, and 8 years (n = 178) with the use of validated, standardized instruments. Selective attention (n = 148) and type of education were evaluated in the 8-year-olds.

RESULTS: Intelligence remained stable and average across development (mean ± SD IQ: at 2 years, 102 ± 18; at 5 years, 100 ± 17; and at 8 years, 99 ± 17 [P = .15]). Children attending regular education without the need for help (n = 101; mean z score: -1.50 ± 1.93) performed significantly better on the selective attention task compared with those children who needed extra help (n = 65; mean z score: -2.54 ± 3.18) or those attending special education (n = 13; mean z score: -4.14 ± 3.63) (P = .03). However, only children attending special education had below-average intelligence (mean IQ: 76 ± 15), compared with average intelligence for those attending regular education, both with help (mean IQ: 95 ± 15) and without help (mean IQ: 105 ± 16). Compared with children with other diagnoses, children with congenital diaphragmatic hernia (CDH) scored significantly lower on both IQ (CDH, mean IQ: 93 ± 20; meconium aspiration syndrome, mean IQ: 100 ± 15; other diagnoses, mean IQ: 100 ± 19 [P = .04]) and selective attention (CDH, mean z score: -3.48 ± 3.46; meconium aspiration syndrome, mean z score: -1.60 ± 2.13; other diagnoses, mean z score: -1.65 ± 2.39 [P = .002]).

CONCLUSIONS: For the majority of neonatal ECMO survivors, intelligence testing alone did not identify those at risk for academic problems. We propose internationally standardized follow-up protocols that focus on long-term, problem-oriented neuropsychological assessment.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app