This is the authors' abstract. We don't add key points for this paper.
Objective:The aim of this study was to examine the long-term neurodevelopmental outcomes of very low birth weight (VLBW) infants and identify factors influencing these outcomes. Methods:A cohort consists of 66 VLBW infants, aged 2 years and older (2-10 years).They were evaluated through neurological examinations, neurodevelopmental screening [using the Denver developmental screening test-II (DDST) and the Wechsler intelligence scale for children-revised (WISC-R)], and cranial magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).Results: Cerebral palsy was diagnosed in 13.6% of cases.Meanwhile, 29.6% had significant neurological sequelae such as sensorineural hearing loss, hydrocephalus, and epilepsy.The other health problems, including attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder, strabismus, and refractive errors (myopia, hypermetropia), were observed in 34.8% of the subjects.Developmental delay affected 73.7% of children assessed with DDST; although, all nine children evaluated with WISC-R had normal cognitive function.Cranial MRI abnormalities were observed in 28.8% of cases.Risk factors, such as polyhydramnios, placenta previa, placental abruption, chorioamnionitis, passive smoking, assisted reproductive technologies, and severe neonatal complications [intraventricular hemorrhage (IVH), periventricular leukomalacia (PVL), and retinopathy of prematurity (ROP)], were linked to poorer outcomes.PVL, IVH, and ROP increased poor prognosis odds by factors of 33, 10, and 5.8, respectively. Conclusion:Although the incidence of major neurological disorders, such as cerebral palsy, has decreased with advances in neonatal intensive care, minor neurodevelopmental issues continue to affect the quality of life in VLBW infants.Prevention strategies should focus on addressing both major and minor neurodevelopmental challenges, with an emphasis on reintegrating VLBW individuals into society as healthier members.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Oktay et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: