Formula versus maternal breast milk for feeding preterm or low birth weight infants.


Journal

The Cochrane database of systematic reviews
ISSN: 1469-493X
Titre abrégé: Cochrane Database Syst Rev
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100909747

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
12 08 2019
Historique:
pubmed: 28 8 2019
medline: 26 9 2019
entrez: 28 8 2019
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Artificial formula can be manipulated to contain higher amounts of macro-nutrients than maternal breast milk but breast milk confers important immuno-nutritional advantages for preterm or low birth weight (LBW) infants. To determine the effect of feeding preterm or LBW infants with formula compared with maternal breast milk on growth and developmental outcomes. We used the standard strategy of Cochrane Neonatal to search the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2018, Issue 9), and Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, Ovid Maternity & Infant Care Database, and CINAHL to October 2018. We searched clinical trials databases, conference proceedings, and the reference lists of retrieved articles. Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials that compared feeding preterm or low birth weight infants with formula versus maternal breast milk. Two review authors planned independently to assess trial eligibility and risk of bias, and extract data. We planned to analyse treatment effects as described in the individual trials and report risk ratios and risk differences for dichotomous data, and mean differences for continuous data, with 95% confidence intervals. We planned to use a fixed-effect model in meta-analyses and to explore potential causes of heterogeneity in subgroup analyses. We planned to use the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of evidence. We did not identify any eligible trials. There are no trials of formula versus maternal breast milk for feeding preterm or low birth weight infants. Such trials are unlikely to be conducted because of the difficulty of allocating an alternative form of nutrition to an infant whose mother wishes to feed with her own breast milk. Maternal breast milk remains the default choice of enteral nutrition because observational studies, and meta-analyses of trials comparing feeding with formula versus donor breast milk, suggest that feeding with breast milk has major immuno-nutritional advantages for preterm or low birth weight infants.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
Artificial formula can be manipulated to contain higher amounts of macro-nutrients than maternal breast milk but breast milk confers important immuno-nutritional advantages for preterm or low birth weight (LBW) infants.
OBJECTIVES
To determine the effect of feeding preterm or LBW infants with formula compared with maternal breast milk on growth and developmental outcomes.
SEARCH METHODS
We used the standard strategy of Cochrane Neonatal to search the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2018, Issue 9), and Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, Ovid Maternity & Infant Care Database, and CINAHL to October 2018. We searched clinical trials databases, conference proceedings, and the reference lists of retrieved articles.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials that compared feeding preterm or low birth weight infants with formula versus maternal breast milk.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors planned independently to assess trial eligibility and risk of bias, and extract data. We planned to analyse treatment effects as described in the individual trials and report risk ratios and risk differences for dichotomous data, and mean differences for continuous data, with 95% confidence intervals. We planned to use a fixed-effect model in meta-analyses and to explore potential causes of heterogeneity in subgroup analyses. We planned to use the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of evidence.
MAIN RESULTS
We did not identify any eligible trials.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There are no trials of formula versus maternal breast milk for feeding preterm or low birth weight infants. Such trials are unlikely to be conducted because of the difficulty of allocating an alternative form of nutrition to an infant whose mother wishes to feed with her own breast milk. Maternal breast milk remains the default choice of enteral nutrition because observational studies, and meta-analyses of trials comparing feeding with formula versus donor breast milk, suggest that feeding with breast milk has major immuno-nutritional advantages for preterm or low birth weight infants.

Identifiants

pubmed: 31452191
doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD002972.pub3
pmc: PMC6710607
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't Systematic Review

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

CD002972

Subventions

Organisme : Department of Health
ID : SRP/16/114/03
Pays : United Kingdom

Commentaires et corrections

Type : UpdateOf

Références

Health Technol Assess. 2009 Aug;13(40):1-146, iii-iv
pubmed: 19728934
Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2015 Mar;100(2):F173-8
pubmed: 25293712
Pediatrics. 2012 Mar;129(3):e827-41
pubmed: 22371471
J Paediatr Child Health. 2012 Sep;48(9):768-76
pubmed: 22970671
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 May 08;(5):CD000343
pubmed: 27155888
Pediatrics. 2014 Jan;133(1):63-70
pubmed: 24344103
J Pediatr. 2013 Mar;162(3 Suppl):S17-25
pubmed: 23445843
Lancet. 1990 Dec 22-29;336(8730):1519-23
pubmed: 1979363
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2001;(3):CD002972
pubmed: 11687034
J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr. 2010 Jan;50(1):85-91
pubmed: 19881390
Neonatology. 2019;115(4):398-405
pubmed: 30974431
Early Hum Dev. 1982 Jan;6(1):47-58
pubmed: 7056196
Pediatr Clin North Am. 2013 Feb;60(1):189-207
pubmed: 23178065
Matern Child Nutr. 2008 Oct;4(4):235-63
pubmed: 18811790
Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2012 Jan;97(1):F56-61
pubmed: 21856644
Pediatrics. 2015 Jul;136(1):e84-92
pubmed: 26101360
Pediatr Res. 1996 Sep;40(3):429-37
pubmed: 8865280
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Jun 20;6:CD002971
pubmed: 29926476
Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2017 Jan;2(1):43-51
pubmed: 28404014
Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2019 May;104(3):F333-F340
pubmed: 30523072
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007 Oct 17;(4):CD002972
pubmed: 17943777
Pediatrics. 2001 Feb;107(2):270-3
pubmed: 11158457
Am J Dis Child. 1987 May;141(5):511-5
pubmed: 3578162
J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2015 Aug;28(12):1482-5
pubmed: 25157499
Dan Med J. 2013 Jun;60(6):A4631
pubmed: 23743111
Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2007 Jul;92(4):F236-8
pubmed: 17585091
J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs. 2010 Jan-Feb;39(1):53-63
pubmed: 20409103
J Pediatr. 1988 Jun;112(6):961-9
pubmed: 3373407
J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr. 2003 Oct;37(4):437-46
pubmed: 14508214
BMC Pediatr. 2014 Aug 30;14:216
pubmed: 25174435
J Trop Pediatr. 2018 Feb 1;64(1):4-14
pubmed: 28369652
Acta Paediatr Scand. 1982 May;71(3):441-5
pubmed: 7136659
Front Nutr. 2017 May 08;4:14
pubmed: 28534028

Auteurs

Jennifer Valeska Elli Brown (JVE)

Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York, York, UK.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH