2025 American and European Guidelines on Neonatal Resuscitation: Concordance and Differences.

IF 3
Neonatology Pub Date : 2026-05-20 DOI:10.1159/000552450
Daniele Trevisanuto, Viraraghavan V Ramaswamy, Somashekhar Nimbalkar, Gary M Weiner
{"title":"2025 American and European Guidelines on Neonatal Resuscitation: Concordance and Differences.","authors":"Daniele Trevisanuto, Viraraghavan V Ramaswamy, Somashekhar Nimbalkar, Gary M Weiner","doi":"10.1159/000552450","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Neonatal resuscitation guidelines are periodically updated to reflect advances in evidence and clinical practice. In October 2025, the American Heart Association-American Academy of Pediatrics (AHA-AAP) and the European Resuscitation Council (ERC) released updated neonatal resuscitation guidelines, both based on the scientific evaluations of the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation. Despite this shared foundation, relevant differences remain between the two documents in terms of scope, structure, and specific clinical recommendations.</p><p><strong>Summary: </strong>We reviewed the documents, identified several areas of divergence, and reached a qualitative consensus about their clinical importance. This narrative review compares the 2025 AHA-AAP and ERC guidelines, focusing on algorithm design, initial stabilization, ventilation strategies, and oxygen administration. Both guidelines promote a gentle, physiology-based approach to neonatal transition and emphasize family-centered care. However, they diverge in several areas, including the complexity of resuscitation algorithms, the management of ventilation, and recommendations for initial inspired oxygen concentration. Many of these differences reflect variations in the scope of the documents rather than conflicting interpretations of evidence.</p><p><strong>Key messages: </strong>Several recommendations continue to rely on limited data and reflect a consensus of expert opinion. Persistent gaps in knowledge underscore the need for further high-quality research to inform future updates and support greater harmonization of neonatal resuscitation practices.</p>","PeriodicalId":94152,"journal":{"name":"Neonatology","volume":" ","pages":"1-8"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-05-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13372278/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neonatology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000552450","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Neonatal resuscitation guidelines are periodically updated to reflect advances in evidence and clinical practice. In October 2025, the American Heart Association-American Academy of Pediatrics (AHA-AAP) and the European Resuscitation Council (ERC) released updated neonatal resuscitation guidelines, both based on the scientific evaluations of the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation. Despite this shared foundation, relevant differences remain between the two documents in terms of scope, structure, and specific clinical recommendations.

Summary: We reviewed the documents, identified several areas of divergence, and reached a qualitative consensus about their clinical importance. This narrative review compares the 2025 AHA-AAP and ERC guidelines, focusing on algorithm design, initial stabilization, ventilation strategies, and oxygen administration. Both guidelines promote a gentle, physiology-based approach to neonatal transition and emphasize family-centered care. However, they diverge in several areas, including the complexity of resuscitation algorithms, the management of ventilation, and recommendations for initial inspired oxygen concentration. Many of these differences reflect variations in the scope of the documents rather than conflicting interpretations of evidence.

Key messages: Several recommendations continue to rely on limited data and reflect a consensus of expert opinion. Persistent gaps in knowledge underscore the need for further high-quality research to inform future updates and support greater harmonization of neonatal resuscitation practices.

2025美国和欧洲新生儿复苏指南:一致性和差异。
背景:新生儿复苏指南定期更新,以反映证据和临床实践的进展。2025年10月,美国心脏协会-美国儿科学会(AHA-AAP)和欧洲复苏委员会(ERC)根据国际复苏联络委员会(ILCOR)的科学评估,发布了最新的新生儿复苏指南。尽管有共同的基础,但两份文献在范围、结构和具体临床建议方面仍然存在相关差异。总结:我们回顾了文献,确定了几个分歧的领域,并就其临床重要性达成了定性共识。这篇叙述性综述比较了2025年AHA-AAP和ERC指南,重点是算法设计、初始稳定、通气策略和给氧。两份指南都提倡温和的、以生理为基础的新生儿过渡方法,并强调以家庭为中心的护理。然而,他们在几个方面存在分歧,包括复苏算法的复杂性、通气管理和初始吸入氧浓度的建议。其中许多差异反映的是文件范围的不同,而不是对证据的相互矛盾的解释。关键信息:一些建议仍然依赖于有限的数据,反映了专家意见的共识。持续存在的知识差距强调需要进一步开展高质量研究,为未来的更新提供信息,并支持新生儿复苏实践的更大协调。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书