OBJECTIVE

Is it reasonable to care for children born under 26 gestational weeks (GW)? To answer this question, we compared outcome at 5 years of 2 groups of children:less or equal to 25 GW+6 days (group 1) and 26-27 GW+6 days (group 2).

METHOD

Retrospective study on extremely preterm children hospitalized in our center between 1999 and 2001. Perinatal data were obtained from medical reports. Five-year outcome was evaluated by questionnaire sent to Centers for Early Medicosocial Intervention, pediatricians or the child's parents. The children were classified according to their disability: none, minor or major. Progression was considered favorable if the child survived with or without minor disability and unfavorable if the child had died or had major disability.

RESULTS

One hundred and sixty-six preterm babies were recorded. In group 1 (n=63), mortality was higher (58% vs 29%; p=0.0002), a neurologic cause was often responsible for death (36% vs 19%; p=0.018), a high level of intracranial hemorrhage was more frequent (35% vs 19%; p=0.002), and a decision to stop healthcare more often made (35% vs 18%; p=0.01) than in group 2 (n=103). Among the 99 survivors, 78 were being followed up at 5 years of age. In terms of disability, no difference was observed between group 1 (n=21) and group 2 (n=57). Including deaths, the risk for unfavorable progression was higher in group 1 (64% vs 41%; p=0.008).

CONCLUSION

The progression of under 26-GW preterm babies is more often unfavorable than the progression of babies born 26-27 GW+6 days. However, given the low number of patients, no significant difference was made concerning the prognosis at 5 years between the survivors of the 2 groups.