Abstract
Now that surfactant is in widespread use, clinical trials are beginning to address the critical question of whether the choice of surfactant really matters in terms of major morbidity and mortality. The trials reported so far focus on the effects of artificial and natural surfactant on acute gas exchange and duration of oxygen or ventilation therapy. Although the number of infants recruited to comparative trials of different surfactants is increasing, we are still a long way from being able reliably to answer the question ‘Which type of surfactant should we use and under what circumstances?’ In understanding the uncertainty in this field it is pertinent to consider the interrelationships between three levels of research for any new therapy in clinical science. At the first level animal studies or case reports suggest potential clinical benefits. At the second, more focused physiological studies and trials address questions of mechanism. At the third, definitive randomised trials compare major adverse clinical outcomes in human patients. Only studies conducted at this third level can finally establish clinical practice on a firm scientific footing. In this review, a preliminary meta-analysis of 801 patients recruited in three trials of artificial (Exosurf) versus natural (Survanta) surfactant shows no clear advantage for either surfactant but does not rule out moderate differences in major adverse outcomes. To establish reliably whether such differences exist will require large multicentre clinical trials. Since neonatal respiratory distress syndrome remains a common and life threatening disease, any moderate reductions in mortality and major morbidity which might be gained from using one type of surfactant rather than another would be important and well worth knowing about. Such clinical trials could answer more than one question by investigating the safety, efficacy and cost-effectiveness of each surfactant in pre-specified groups of patients stratified by initial clinical risk and illness severity and by simultaneously addressing other therapeutic issues using factorial designs. Despite their organisational problems, until such definitive “third level” comparative clinical trials of different surfactants are performed key questions for clinicians, patients and policy-makers will remain unanswered.
Similar content being viewed by others
Abbreviations
- RDS :
-
respiratory distress syndrome
References
Alvarado M, Hingre R, Hakanson D, Gross S (1993) Clinical trial of Survanta versus Exosurf in Infants<1500 f with respiratory distress syndrome. Pediatr Res 33:314A
Chida S, Phelps DS, Soll RF, Taeusch HW (1991) Surfactant proteins and anti-surfactant antibodies in sera from infants with respiratory distress syndrome. Pediatrics 88:84–89
CLASP Study Group () Collaborative study of low dose aspirin in pregnancy. Protocol available from Clinical Trials Service Unit, Radcliffe Infirmary, Oxford OX2 6HE, UK
Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (1993) Cochrane Updates on Disk, Update Software, Oxford
Cummings JJ, Holm BA, Hudak ML, et al (1992) A controlled clinical comparison of four different surfactant preparations in surfactant deficient preterm lambs. Am Rev Respir Dis 145:999–1004
Hall SB, Venkitaraman AR, Whitsett JA et al (1992) Importance of hydrophobic apoproteins as constituents of clinical exogenous surfactants. Am Rev Respir Dis 145:24–30
Halliday H, Tarnow-Mordi WO, Corcoran JD, Patterson CC. A multicentre randomised trial comparing high and low dose surfactant regimens for the treatment of respiratory distress syndrome (The Curosurf 4 Trial). Arch Dis Child (in press)
HIFI Study Group (1989) High-frequency oscillatory ventilation compared with conventional mechanical ventilation in the treatment of respiratory failure in preterm infants. N Engl J Med 320:88–93
Horbar JD, Wright LL, Soll RF, et al (1993) A multicenter trial comparing two surfactants. Pediatr Res 33:215A
International Neonatal Network (1993) The CRIB (clinical risk index for babies) score: a tool for assessing initial neonatal risk and comparing the performance of neonatal intensive care units. Lancet 342:193–198
ISIS-I Collaborative Group (1986) Randomised trial of intravenous atenolol among 16,027 cases of suspected acute myocardial infarction: ISIS-I. Lancet 2:57–65
ISIS-2 Collaborative Group (1988) Randomised trial of intravenous streptokinase, or aspirin, both or neither among 17,187 cases of suspected acute myocardial infarction. Lancet 2:349–360
ISIS-3 Collaborative Group (1992) A randomised comparison of streptokinase versus tissue plasminogen activator versus anistreplase and of aspirin plus heparin versus aspirin alone among 41,299 cases of suspected acute myocardial infarction. Lancet 339:753–770
ISIS-4 Collaborative Group (1992) Protocol available from Clinical Trials Service Unit and Department of Cardiovascular medicine, Radcliffe Infirmary, Oxford
Lucey JF (1991) The surfactant erastarting off right! Pediatrics 88:168
MacDonald D, Grant A, Sheridan-Pereira M, Boylan P, Chalmers I (1985) The dublin randomised controlled trial of intrapartum fetal heart rate monitoring. Am J Obstet Gynecol 152:524–539
Merritt TA, Strayer DS, Hallman M, Spragg RD, Wozniak P (1988) Immunologic consequences of exogenous surfactant administration. Sem Perinatol 12:221–230
Merritt TA, Hallman M, Spragg R, et al (1989) Exogenous surfactant treatments for neonatal respiratory distress syndrome and their potential role in the adult respiratory distress syndrome. Drugs 38:591–611
Osiris Collaborative Group (1992) Early versus delayed neonatal administration of a synthetic surfactant—the judgement of OSIRIS. Lancet 340:1363–1369
Pearlman SA, Leef KH, Stefano JL, et al (1993) A randomized trial comparing Exosurf versus Survanta in the treatment of neonatal RDS. Pediatr Res 33:340A
Richardson DK, Gray JE, McCormick MC, et al (1993) Score for neonatal acute physiology: a physiology severity index for neonatal intensive care. Pediatrics 91:617–623
Robertson B, Van Golde LMG, Batenburg JJ (eds) (1992) Pulmonary surfactant. From molecular biology to clinical practice. Elsevier, Amsterdam
Soll RF, McQueen MC (1992) Respiratory distress syndrome. In: Sinclair JC, Bracken MB (eds) Effective care of the newborn infant. Oxford University Press, pp 335–358
Steer PA, Lucas A, Sinclair JC (1992) Feeding the low birthweight infant. In: Sinclair JC, Bracken MB (eds) Effective care of the newborn infant. Oxford University Press, pp 133–134
Stenson BJ, Glover R, Parry G, Wilkie RA, Laing IA, Tarnow-Mordi WO. Static respiratory compliance in the newborn III: early changes following exogenous surfactant therapy. Arch Dis Child (in press)
Strayer DS, Vitetta ES, Kohler H (1975) Anti-receptor antibody 1. Isolation and characterization of the immunoglobulin receptor for phosphoryl choline. J Immunol 114:722–727
Wilkie RA, Bryan MH, Tarnow-Mordi WO () Static Respiratory compliance in newborn infants II: Its potential for improving the selection of intants for early surfactant therapy. Arch Dis Child (in press)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Tarnow-Mordi, W.O., Soll, R.F. Artificial versus natural surfactant — Can we base clinical practice on a firm scientific footing?. Eur J Pediatr 153 (Suppl 2), S17–S21 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02179668
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02179668