But What Was "It"? Talking to Parents About BRUE.

The term BRUE (Brief resolved unexplained event) was proposed by the American Academy of Pediatrics in 2016 to replace the term ALTE (Apparent life-threatening event), which in turn replaced the so-called near-miss sudden infant death syndrome in 1986. This latest change is intended to avoid unnecessary hospitalizations and reduce the use of high-cost, low-yield laboratory and imaging tests. However, we believe that in the absence of clinical guidelines that guide the management of the BRUE, that objective may not be met. We present a clinical guideline prepared for Hospital Dr. Exequiel González Cortés, in Santiago, Chile.

To evaluate the current knowledge on the relationship between infant sleep position and sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS), and to determine how the information can be used to guide further activities in the United States. Data from international vital statistics, epidemiologic studies of SIDS risk factors, and studies of outcomes of public health interventions that advocated nonprone sleeping to reduce the risk for SIDS were discussed at a meeting held by the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) with cosponsorship from the National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders (NIDCD), and the National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) on January 13, and 14, 1994. Trends in postneonatal mortality and SIDS rates from 1980 through 1992 were evaluated for Australia, Britain, New Zealand, the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, and the United States. All of the countries that experienced a rapid decline in prone sleeping also had reductions of approximately 50% in their SIDS rates. Postneonatal mortality rates dropped as well, with the reduction in SIDS being the primary contributor to the reported declines. The major behavioral change in all targeted populations was in sleep position. No significant changes were observed in the proportion of parents who smoked cigarettes, or in breast-feeding. Preliminary data from population-based studies showed there were no reported adverse outcomes associated with a change to side or back sleep position, such as an increase in deaths due to aspiration or in apparent life-threatening events. The overwhelming opinion of the assembled experts was that the evidence justified greater effort to reach parents with the American Academy of Pediatrics' recommendation that healthy infants, when being put down to sleep, be positioned on their side or back.

Bulbo-spinal pathology and sudden respiratory infant death syndrome.

The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) higher-risk criteria for brief resolved unexplained events (BRUE) have a low positive predictive value (4.8%) and misclassify most infants as higher risk (>90%). New BRUE prediction rules from a US cohort of 3283 infants showed improved discrimination; however, these rules have not been validated in an external cohort. To externally validate new BRUE prediction rules and compare them with the AAP higher-risk criteria. This was a retrospective multicenter cohort study conducted from 2017 to 2021 and monitored for 90 days after index presentation. The setting included infants younger than 1 year with a BRUE identified through retrospective chart review from 11 Canadian hospitals. Study data were analyzed from March 2022 to March 2024. The BRUE prediction rules. The primary outcome was a serious underlying diagnosis, defined as conditions where a delay in diagnosis could lead to increased morbidity or mortality. Of 1042 patients (median [IQR] age, 41 [13-84] days; 529 female [50.8%]), 977 (93.8%) were classified as higher risk by the AAP criteria. A total of 79 patients (7.6%) had a serious underlying diagnosis. For this outcome, the AAP criteria demonstrated a sensitivity of 100.0% (95% CI, 95.4%-100.0%), a specificity of 6.7% (95% CI, 5.2%-8.5%), a positive likelihood ratio (LR+) of 1.07 (95% CI, 1.05-1.09), and an AUC of 0.53 (95% CI, 0.53-0.54). The BRUE prediction rule for discerning serious diagnoses displayed an AUC of 0.60 (95% CI, 0.54-0.67; calibration intercept: 0.60), which improved to an AUC of 0.71 (95% CI, 0.65-0.76; P < .001; calibration intercept: 0.00) after model revision. Event recurrence was noted in 163 patients (15.6%). For this outcome, the AAP criteria yielded a sensitivity of 99.4% (95% CI, 96.6%-100.0%), a specificity of 7.3% (95% CI, 5.7%-9.2%), an LR+ of 1.07 (95% CI, 1.05-1.10), and an AUC of 0.58 (95% CI, 0.56-0.58). The AUC of the prediction rule stood at 0.67 (95% CI, 0.62-0.72; calibration intercept: 0.15). Results of this multicenter cohort study show that the BRUE prediction rules outperformed the AAP higher-risk criteria on external geographical validation, and performance improved after recalibration. These rules provide clinicians and families with a more precise tool to support decision-making, grounded in individual risk tolerance.

Brief resolved unexplained event (BRUE) are transient and worrying episodes observed in infants and are characterized by changes in skin color, breathing, muscle tone, and/or responsiveness. We describe the case of a female infant who was initially diagnosed with BRUE but was later determined to have intussusception. She presented to our emergency department with a transient pallor and a single episode of vomiting that resolved before her visit. Physicians did not detect any abnormalities on physical or laboratory examinations, so she was diagnosed with BRUE and discharged to be re-evaluated the next day. After returning home, she vomited several times. The patient revisited our hospital the following day and was definitively diagnosed with intussusception using ultrasonography, which was successfully treated using fluoroscopy-guided hydrostatic reduction. This case was initially diagnosed as a BRUE; however, re-evaluation helped in identifying the proper diagnosis of intussusception. Physicians should exercise caution when diagnosing patients with BRUE. When the diagnostic criteria are not completely met, follow-up should be conducted, assuming that the patient has a potentially serious condition.

The American Academy of Pediatrics published guidelines for evaluation and management of lower-risk infants for a brief resolved unexplained event (BRUE). The guideline identified gaps in knowledge related to caregiver satisfaction, anxiety, and family-centered educational strategies to improve caregiver experience and patient outcomes. The objective of this study was to understand caregivers' experience with hospitalization for infants with BRUE, including their perception of the hospital stay, the diagnosis of BRUE, and their feelings toward the upcoming discharge from the hospital. We conducted a qualitative study using semistructured interviews with caregivers of infants aged 0 to 12 months who were admitted to a quaternary care children's hospital for a BRUE. Interviews were conducted within 24 hours of discharge. Two investigators coded transcripts and identified themes using consensus. Eighteen caregivers of 13 infants were interviewed. No infants met criteria for being low risk according to the American Academy of Pediatrics guidelines. The coding scheme produced 3 major themes. First, parents felt reassured by hospital monitoring, diagnostic evaluation, and staff support in the hospital. Second, parents felt unsettled by the uncertainty of the child's condition and whether BRUE's "unexplainable" quality is understood as being part of normal infant behavior. Third, these themes manifested as conflicting emotions about caregivers' readiness for discharge. Although hospital monitoring may provide reassurance for some caregivers, they continue to struggle with the uncertainty of the diagnosis. Caregiver perspectives can inform physicians' strategies to improve hospital experience and discharge readiness.

Breastfeeding, Baby-Friendly, and Safety: Getting the Balance Right

Hyper-releasability of mast cells in family members of infants with sudden infant death syndrome and apparent life-threatening events

Brief resolved unexplained events (BRUEs) are frequently encountered in infants younger than 1 year. By definition, these events require the infant to be asymptomatic and at baseline at the time of presentation, with no significant abnormalities on examination and no discernible explanatory diagnosis. Research has shown that less than 5% of BRUE cases are attributable to serious underlying conditions, with no increased mortality risk and no increased risk of sudden infant death syndrome. Despite these findings, approximately 63% of patients with BRUEs are hospitalized and up to 82% undergo diagnostic tests, which predominantly result in false-positive findings. Such results may lead to unnecessarily prolonged hospital stays, additional tests or consultations, and increased parental anxiety. The management of a patient who has experienced a BRUE can be challenging for providers and parents alike. Although risk is known to be low in these infants, providers may be compelled to explain the event and provide reassurance. Caregivers oftentimes are concerned that the events may reoccur and be a harbinger of a missed diagnosis. Shared decision-making can be used to explain risk and the benefit of additional testing and hospitalization. This family-centered strategy can align care with the family's values, provide reassurance, and decrease decisional conflict.

Hypercarbic ventilatory responses of infants at risk for SIDS.

American Academy of Pediatrics released a clinical practice guideline (CPG) in 2016 recommending the term apparent life-threatening events (ALTE) be replaced by brief resolved unexplained events (BRUE). The CPG provides recommendations for the clinical evaluation and management of infants with this condition based on the risk of a serious underlying disorder or repeat event. The lower-risk CPG was applied to a modelled population, studying predictors of hospital admission, defined as length of stay (LOS)≥24hours. An algorithm was derived using a Pediatric Emergency Care Applied Research Network database. Propensity score weighting, based on probability of following the CPG, determined the adjusted odds ratio (aOR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) of hospital admission. Multiple imputation allowed any missing data problems be addressed and a sensitivity analysis of database robustness. Applying the modelling algorithm, 3116 observations were identified, among whom 1974 (63.4%) the CPG was followed and 1142 (36.6%) not followed. The CPG was followed for 60.1% of infants staying ≥24hours compared with 76.6% of infants staying <24hours (P<.001). After propensity score weighting and multiple imputation, the likelihood of hospital admission was significantly lower when the CPG was followed (aOR=0.49; 95% CI, 0.39-0.62, P<.001). Results suggest that use of the CPG under strict conditions would lead to fewer hospital admissions among infants with a lower-risk BRUE. Implementation of CPGs in modelled populations may help clinicians identify unanticipated factors and address these issues beforehand. We noted differences in care based on race, necessitating further investigation.

S udden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS) is the third leading cause of infant mortality in North Carolina.Five-year trends show that approximately 100 babies under the age of one year continue to die suddenly and unexpectedly in North Carolina each year.The SIDS landscape is one in which North Carolina's rate has consistently exceeded the national rate.In 1988 the NC SIDS rate was 1.87 per 1,000 live births compared to the US rate of 1.4 per 1,000 live births.In the intervening thirteen years, SIDS rates have dramatically decreased.The state's lowest SIDS rate ever, 0.7 per 1,000 live births, was reported for 2002.From 1995 to 2002 the NC SIDS rate has fallen 36%. 1 While this decline in SIDS is certainly good news, it tells only half of the story and should be viewed with cautious optimism.As with infant mortality, the SIDS rates reflect an unacceptable disparity among populations.African American infants are dying from SIDS at twice the rate of white infants.From 1998-2002 NC African Americans accounted for 41% of SIDS deaths, a rate of 1.35 per 1,000 live births, compared to the white rate of .66 per 1,000 births or 58% of SIDS cases.American Indians accounted for 1% of SIDS deaths, a rate of .83 per 1,000 live births, during this same timeframe.Public education and awareness campaigns have contributed to reductions in SIDS rates.The reversal in the infant sleep positioning message from the prone to the supine or to the side by the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) in 1992 and the 1994 National Back To Sleep Campaign's reinforcement of this message resulted in a greater proportion of infants positioned on their back or side for sleeping and a corresponding 50% drop in SIDS deaths nationally.

Sudden infant death syndrome: neonatal hypodynamia (reduced exercise level)

A brief resolved unexplained event (BRUE) describes an event associated with a change in muscle tone, color, respiration, and responsiveness that is unexplained after an appropriate examination. Some infants with higher risk BRUE may undergo endoscopy as part of their evaluation. This retrospective study aimed to identify the endoscopic findings in infants who have experienced a higher risk BRUE. We also compared the characteristics, prenatal, natal, and postnatal risk factors between 23 infants who underwent endoscopic evaluation and 23 race-matched/sex-matched/term-matched/preterm-matched infants who did not undergo endoscopic evaluation. This was a retrospective descriptive study. Infants were identified from a query of medical records using the ICD-10 code for BRUE (R68.13). Of 119 infants with BRUE, 23 infants with higher risk BRUE underwent an esophagogastroduodenoscopy and flexible sigmoidoscopy. Apnea (87%) was the most common presentation of BRUE. Most were female (57%) with a mean age at BRUE presentation of 2.73 months. We found 10 (43.5%) term infants and 13 (56.5%) preterm infants in our study. There were no significant differences in characteristics, prenatal, natal, and postnatal risk factors between the infants who underwent endoscopy and those who did not undergo endoscopy. The most common abnormal endoscopic finding was lymphonodular hyperplasia (LNH) associated with eosinophilia in the rectosigmoid colon. The proportion of females in the LNH group was significantly higher than the non-LNH group. Rectosigmoid LNH and eosinophilia, which are associated with milk soy protein intolerance (MSPI), were the most common findings on endoscopic evaluation. Although there is no proof of causation between MSPI and BRUE, MSPI should be considered in the differential diagnosis for higher risk BRUE.

In 2016, brief resolved unexplained events (BRUEs) were proposed as alternative concepts to apparent life-threatening event (ALTE). The clinical utility of managing ALTE cases according to the BRUE classification is controversial. To verify the clinical utility of the BRUE criteria, we evaluated the proportion of ALTE patients who met and those who did not meet the BRUE criteria and assessed the diagnoses and outcomes of each group. We retrospectively investigated patients with ALTE younger than 12 months who visited the emergency department of the National Center for Child Health and Development from April 2008 to March 2020. The patients were classified into the higher-risk and lower-risk BRUE groups; however, those who did not meet the BRUE criteria were classified into the ALTE-not-BRUE group. We evaluated the diagnoses and outcomes of each group. Adverse outcomes included death, recurrence, aspiration, choking, trauma, infection, convulsions, heart disease, metabolic disease, allergies, and others. Over the period of 12 years, a total of 192 patients were included, among which 140 patients (71%) were classified into the ALTE-not-BRUE group, 43 (22%) into the higher-risk BRUE group, and 9 (5%) into the lower-risk BRUE group. Adverse outcomes occurred in 27 patients in the ALTE-not-BRUE group and 10 patients in the higher-risk BRUE group. No adverse outcome occurred in the lower-risk BRUE group. Many of the patients with ALTE were classified into the ALTE-not-BRUE group, suggesting that replacing ALTE with BRUE is difficult. Although patients classified as lower-risk BRUE showed no adverse outcomes, there were only a few of them. In the pediatric emergency medicine setting, the BRUE risk classification may be beneficial for certain patients.