To compare patients treated for incomplete Kawasaki disease whose practitioners followed versus did not follow American Heart Association criteria and to evaluate the association of cardiology consultation with adherence to these guidelines.

Single centre retrospective cohort study of patients <18 years old who received ≥1 dose of intravenous immunoglobulin for Kawasaki disease between 01/2006 and 01/2018. We collected demographics, clinical and laboratory data, coronary artery abnormalities, and cardiology consultation status. Patients treated for incomplete Kawasaki disease were divided into two groups based on adherence versus nonadherence to American Heart Association guidelines and compared by Wilcoxon rank sum test and chi-squared or Fisher’s exact test.

Of the 357 patients treated for Kawasaki disease, 109 (31%) were classified as incomplete Kawasaki disease. The American Heart Association algorithm for identifying patients with incomplete Kawasaki disease was followed in 81/109 (74%). Coronary artery abnormalities were present in 46/109 (42%) of the patients who were treated for incomplete Kawasaki disease. Cardiology consultation was more frequent in those fulfilling American Heart Association criteria for the diagnosis of incomplete Kawasaki disease versus those who did not fulfill criteria (76% versus 48%, p = 0.005).

Over 25% of patients treated for incomplete Kawasaki disease did not meet American Heart Association guidelines. Guidelines were more frequently followed when the paediatric cardiology team was consulted. Consulting physicians with experience and expertise in the evaluation and management of incomplete KD should be strongly considered in the care of these patients.

The Pediatric Heart Network Normal Echocardiogram Database Study had unanticipated challenges. We sought to describe these challenges and lessons learned to improve the design of future studies.

Challenges were divided into three categories: enrolment, echocardiographic imaging, and protocol violations. Memoranda, Core Lab reports, and adjudication logs were reviewed. A centre-level questionnaire provided information regarding local processes for data collection. Descriptive statistics were used, and chi-square tests determined differences in imaging quality.

For the 19 participating centres, challenges with enrolment included variations in Institutional Review Board definitions of “retrospective” eligibility, overestimation of non-White participants, centre categorisation of Hispanic participants that differed from National Institutes of Health definitions, and exclusion of potential participants due to missing demographic data. Institutional Review Board amendments resolved many of these challenges. There was an unanticipated burden imposed on centres due to high numbers of echocardiograms that were reviewed but failed to meet submission criteria. Additionally, image transfer software malfunctions delayed Core Lab image review and feedback. Between the early and late study periods, the proportion of unacceptable echocardiograms submitted to the Core Lab decreased (14 versus 7%, p < 0.01). Most protocol violations were from eligibility violations and inadvertent protected health information disclosure (overall 2.5%). Adjudication committee reviews led to protocol changes.

Numerous challenges encountered during the Normal Echocardiogram Database Study prolonged study enrolment. The retrospective design and flaws in image transfer software were key impediments to study completion and should be considered when designing future studies collecting echocardiographic images as a primary outcome.

Children with congenital heart disease are at high risk for malnutrition. Standardisation of feeding protocols has shown promise in decreasing some of this risk. With little standardisation between institutions’ feeding protocols and no understanding of protocol adherence, it is important to analyse the efficacy of individual aspects of the protocols.

Adherence to and deviation from a feeding protocol in high-risk congenital heart disease patients between December 2015 and March 2017 were analysed. Associations between adherence to and deviation from the protocol and clinical outcomes were also assessed. The primary outcome was change in weight-for-age z score between time intervals.

Increased adherence to and decreased deviation from individual instructions of a feeding protocol improves patients change in weight-for-age z score between birth and hospital discharge (p = 0.031). Secondary outcomes such as markers of clinical severity and nutritional delivery were not statistically different between groups with high or low adherence or deviation rates.

High-risk feeding protocol adherence and fewer deviations are associated with weight gain independent of their influence on nutritional delivery and caloric intake. Future studies assessing the efficacy of feeding protocols should include the measures of adherence and deviations that are not merely limited to caloric delivery and illness severity.