PEDIATRICS Vol. 58 No. 3 September 1976, pp. 463-464
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow P3Rs: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when P3Rs are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow E-mail this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My File Cabinet
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via CrossRef
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Rosenfeld, C. R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Rosenfeld, C. R.

Questions on Theophylline

Charles R. Rosenfeld M.D.1

1 Assistant Professor of Pediatrics and Obstetrics and Gynecology, The University of Texas Health Science Center, 5323 Harry Hines Boulevard Dallas, Texas 75235

The articles by Shannon et al.1 and Uauy et al.2 concerning the treatment of apnea in low-birthweight infants are of great interest, and, as noted in the commentary by Lucey,3 their topic should stimulate a great deal of research and controversy. The controversy began when Dr. Shannon presented his paper on the use of theophylline at the annual meeting of the APS-SPR (Denver, Colorado; April 1975). During the discussion, it was very clearly pointed out by a number of individuals that, by virtue of the data, theophylline cannot be considered an acceptable mode of treating apnea in preterm or low-birthweight infants at the present time.