In the evolving landscape of neonatal medicine, the management of hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy (HIE) in late preterm infants represents a forefront of clinical research and debate. Recently, a profound discourse was sparked by critiques from El-Dib regarding the therapeutic approach of hypothermia in preterm infants ranging from 33 to 35 weeks gestational age (GA). This dialogue centers around the intricate balance of potential benefits and risks of whole body hypothermia as a neuroprotective strategy in this vulnerable population. Researchers Faix, Laptook, Shankaran, and colleagues have issued a detailed response, emphasizing the critical need for rigorous, evidence-based investigation while cautiously interpreting the available data from their own randomized controlled trial (RCT).
Therapeutic hypothermia has been an established intervention in full-term infants with HIE, substantially improving neurological outcomes. However, the extension of this approach to preterm infants, particularly those below 36 weeks GA, remains contentious. The physiology of late preterm infants presents unique complexities; their brain maturation, metabolic rates, and susceptibility to injury differ significantly from those of full-term neonates. These physiological nuances necessitate meticulously designed trials to ascertain whether hypothermia can confer similar neuroprotection without introducing undue adverse effects.
The RCT conducted by Faix and colleagues specifically targeted the 33–35 weeks GA subgroup, a population often excluded from larger hypothermia trials yet representing a significant clinical challenge. The trial sought to evaluate both safety parameters and efficacy outcomes of whole body hypothermia in this cohort, employing stringent protocols to monitor neurological function, physiological responses, and long-term developmental trajectories. Despite the promising design and execution, the trial’s findings did not establish definitive efficacy or safety, underscoring the pressing need for further expansive research.
El-Dib’s critiques illuminate several methodological and interpretative challenges inherent in such clinical investigations. Issues raised include sample size limitations, potential confounders, and the scalability of trial findings to broader clinical practice. Faix et al. readily acknowledge these concerns, advocating for larger, multicenter trials with standardized methodologies to validate or refute their preliminary observations. This acknowledgment highlights the complexity of neonatal research, where ethical considerations and clinical urgencies intersect with statistical rigor and reproducibility.
A pivotal aspect of this ongoing dialogue is the delicate assessment of adverse effects potentially induced by hypothermia. In preterm infants, thermoregulatory mechanisms are inherently immature, and hypothermia may pose risks such as coagulopathy, electrolyte imbalances, or cardiac dysrhythmias. The trial meticulously tracked these parameters, reporting occurrences with precision, yet the small cohort size precludes broad generalization. Consequently, the safety profile remains indeterminate, demanding cautious optimism and rigorous surveillance in future explorations.
Neurological outcomes following hypoxic injury are multifaceted and evolve over time, necessitating longitudinal follow-up beyond immediate post-treatment phases. Faix and colleagues are transparent about this limitation, emphasizing that their study provides a snapshot rather than a definitive projection of long-term developmental impact. This temporal factor mandates a spectrum of research methodologies, including neuroimaging, electrophysiological studies, and comprehensive neurodevelopmental assessments extending into childhood.
The exchange provoked by El-Dib and the subsequent response by Faix et al. underscores a critical principle in translational neonatal research: the balance between innovation and evidence. It is tempting to extrapolate benefits observed in term infants to the preterm population, yet such decisions must be anchored in robust data to avoid unwarranted harm. This principle is particularly relevant in the context of HIE, where neurologic injury can have profound lifelong consequences, and therapeutic windows may be narrow.
Emerging biomarkers and advanced imaging techniques offer promising adjuncts to conventional clinical parameters, providing deeper insights into injury mechanisms and treatment responses. Incorporating such tools into future hypothermia trials may enhance patient stratification, risk assessment, and individualized therapy. This multi-modal approach aligns with precision medicine paradigms increasingly adopted across neonatology and pediatrics.
The discourse also opens avenues for exploring adjunct therapies alongside hypothermia, potentially synergizing neuroprotective effects. Pharmacologic agents targeting oxidative stress, inflammation, or excitotoxic pathways are under investigation, raising possibilities for combination therapies tailored to gestational age and injury severity. Integrating such modalities necessitates a foundational understanding of hypothermia’s role and limitations in the preterm brain’s milieu.
Clinical implementation of whole body hypothermia in the late preterm population must proceed cautiously, with multidisciplinary teams closely monitoring treatment response and complications. Standardized protocols, inclusive of inclusion-exclusion criteria, temperature targets, and monitoring guidelines, are vital to maintaining patient safety. Furthermore, caregivers and families require transparent communication regarding benefits, uncertainties, and potential risks to facilitate informed decision-making.
Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic variations in preterm infants also merit consideration when applying therapeutic hypothermia. Hypothermia can alter drug metabolism and organ function, potentially affecting concomitant treatments. Tailoring medication regimens alongside hypothermia demands careful attention to dosing, timing, and adverse effect profiles, reinforcing the necessity for comprehensive clinical protocols and vigilant monitoring.
The discussion extends beyond immediate clinical outcomes to health economics and resource allocation. Hypothermia therapy involves specialized equipment, trained personnel, and hospitalization in neonatal intensive care units. Assessing cost-effectiveness relative to clinical benefit, particularly in populations with uncertain efficacy, is essential to inform health policy and optimize resource utilization without compromising care quality.
International collaboration presents an optimal framework for advancing knowledge in this arena. Pooling data through multicenter registries and harmonizing trial designs can enhance statistical power and generalizability. Such alliances also foster knowledge exchange and establish consensus guidelines, accelerating the translation of research findings into standardized clinical practice.
As neonatal care continues to evolve, so does the ethical landscape surrounding experimental therapies in vulnerable populations. The imperative to alleviate suffering and prevent disability must be balanced against the potential for harm from unproven interventions. Transparent reporting, ongoing ethical scrutiny, and engagement with families underpin responsible clinical research and practice in this sensitive domain.
Ultimately, the exchange between El-Dib and Faix et al. epitomizes scientific discourse’s vital role in refining neonatal therapeutic strategies. Through robust debate and critical appraisal, the field can move closer to establishing safe, effective interventions that improve outcomes for late preterm infants afflicted with hypoxic-ischemic insults. The current RCT provides a foundational platform, yet it is clear that further rigorous investigation is indispensable.
In this complex and rapidly advancing field, clinicians and researchers must remain vigilant, agile, and collaborative. The pursuit of evidence-backed treatments for HIE in late preterm infants holds the promise of transforming vulnerable lives. However, this promise can only be fulfilled by steadfast commitment to methodical, ethical, and transparent research endeavors that honor the trust placed in the caregivers of our youngest patients.
Subject of Research: Therapeutic hypothermia for hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy in late preterm infants (33–35 weeks gestational age).
Article Title: Reply to: Benefits and risks of therapeutic hypothermia for hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy in late preterm infants.
Article References:
Faix, R.G., Laptook, A.R., Shankaran, S. et al. Reply to: Benefits and risks of therapeutic hypothermia for hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy in late preterm infants. Pediatr Res (2025). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41390-025-04675-w
Image Credits: AI Generated
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41390-025-04675-w
Tags: brain maturation in late pretermsclinical research in neonatal carecritiques of neonatal hypothermia interventionsevidence-based neonatal medicinehypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy managementlate preterm infant caremetabolic challenges in preterm infantsneurological outcomes in hypothermia treatmentneuroprotection strategies in neonatologyrandomized controlled trials in preterm populationsrisks and benefits of hypothermiatherapeutic hypothermia in preterm infants
