Background Advances in perinatal and neonatal care have progressively lowered the threshold of viability and improved survival among extremely preterm infants (EPIs). However, this increase in survival has not consistently been accompanied by comparable improvements in neurological outcomes, which in a relevant proportion of cases remain poor. This discrepancy generates the ethical dilemma of deciding whether to proceed with active resuscitation at the margins of viability. Historically, decisions have relied heavily on gestational age (GA), yet this single parameter has proven insufficient. Purpose This narrative review examines the conceptual and practical challenges in determining the limit of active resuscitation and explores how healthcare professionals and international scientific and bioethical committees have addressed this issue, as well as how families experience and cope with it. Results Evidence demonstrates that multiple fetal and pregnancy-related factors significantly influence survival and long-term neurodevelopmental outcomes, outperforming GA alone. Simultaneously, clinicians and families are confronted with prognostic uncertainty, psychological burdens, and cognitive biases that complicate decision-making. In this context, shared decision-making emerges not as a simple transfer of information, but as an interpretative process centered on the newborn’s best interests. Conclusion No universal gestational threshold can determine when resuscitation should or should not be initiated. Rather, the “limit” is best understood as a case-specific decision point, shaped by prognosis, parental values, ethical judgment, and clinical feasibility. Future efforts should focus not on eliminating the grey area, but on developing ethically grounded strategies for navigating it responsibly, compassionately, and with intellectual humility.<Table Float="No" ID="Taba"> <tgroup cols="2"> <colspec align="left" colname="c1" colnum="1" /> <colspec align="left" colname="c2" colnum="2" /> <tbody> <row> <entry nameend="c2" namest="c1"> What is known: • Gestational age alone is widely used to guide resuscitation decisions, but it is an imprecise and insufficient parameter. • Multiple clinical and perinatal factors significantly influence prognosis. </entry> </row> <row> <entry nameend="c2" namest="c1"> What is new: • The limit of resuscitation is context-dependent, shaped by prognosis, parental values, and ethical judgment. • Shared decision-making is not just information sharing, but a collaborative process to determine the newborn’s best interests. </entry> </row> </tbody> </tgroup> </Table>

From “can we treat?” to “should we treat?”: a narrative review on resuscitation limits at the threshold of viability

期刊论文
发表日期：

2026年1月3日

查看全文

Carlo Dani,
Camilla Fazi

摘要

Background

Advances in perinatal and neonatal care have progressively lowered the threshold of viability and improved survival among extremely preterm infants (EPIs). However, this increase in survival has not consistently been accompanied by comparable improvements in neurological outcomes, which in a relevant proportion of cases remain poor. This discrepancy generates the ethical dilemma of deciding whether to proceed with active resuscitation at the margins of viability. Historically, decisions have relied heavily on gestational age (GA), yet this single parameter has proven insufficient.

Purpose

This narrative review examines the conceptual and practical challenges in determining the limit of active resuscitation and explores how healthcare professionals and international scientific and bioethical committees have addressed this issue, as well as how families experience and cope with it.

Results

Evidence demonstrates that multiple fetal and pregnancy-related factors significantly influence survival and long-term neurodevelopmental outcomes, outperforming GA alone. Simultaneously, clinicians and families are confronted with prognostic uncertainty, psychological burdens, and cognitive biases that complicate decision-making. In this context, shared decision-making emerges not as a simple transfer of information, but as an interpretative process centered on the newborn’s best interests.

Conclusion

No universal gestational threshold can determine when resuscitation should or should not be initiated. Rather, the “limit” is best understood as a case-specific decision point, shaped by prognosis, parental values, ethical judgment, and clinical feasibility. Future efforts should focus not on eliminating the grey area, but on developing ethically grounded strategies for navigating it responsibly, compassionately, and with intellectual humility.

What is known:

• Gestational age alone is widely used to guide resuscitation decisions, but it is an imprecise and insufficient parameter.

• Multiple clinical and perinatal factors significantly influence prognosis.

What is new:

• The limit of resuscitation is context-dependent, shaped by prognosis, parental values, and ethical judgment.

• Shared decision-making is not just information sharing, but a collaborative process to determine the newborn’s best interests.