Optimizing Delivery of Breast Milk for Premature Infants: Comparison of Current Enteral Feeding Systems.
ENFit
dietary fats
enteral nutrition
human milk
neonate
premature infant
syringes
Journal
Nutrition in clinical practice : official publication of the American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition
ISSN: 1941-2452
Titre abrégé: Nutr Clin Pract
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 8606733
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Aug 2020
Aug 2020
Historique:
pubmed:
13
11
2019
medline:
22
4
2021
entrez:
13
11
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Incomplete delivery of fat from expressed breast milk (EBM) during enteral feeding to premature neonates remains a significant problem. Feeding system manufacturers have introduced changes to the enteral syringe design to improve fat delivery that have not yet been evaluated in the literature. This study compares percentage delivery of fat from EBM using 2 major enteral feeding systems in various configurations with silicone and polyurethane tubing material and ENFit and Legacy connection systems at 3 clinically relevant infusion rates. The percent of fat delivery from EBM was significantly higher for the eccentric syringe system than the concentric system (P = 0.036) but did not vary significantly across infusion rates (P = 0.081). Silicone tubing had a significantly higher percent of fat delivery than polyurethane tubing within the eccentric syringe system (P = 0.039) but did not vary significantly across infusion rates (P = 0.105). There was no significant difference between ENFit and Legacy connectors using eccentric syringes with silicone tubing (P = 0.360). We demonstrate that changes to syringe design and tubing material are effective and improve fat delivery from EBM, which may result in improved growth and outcomes in premature infants. The eccentric syringe marginally improves fat delivery in comparison with the concentric syringe, and silicone tubing significantly improves fat delivery compared with polyurethane tubing.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Incomplete delivery of fat from expressed breast milk (EBM) during enteral feeding to premature neonates remains a significant problem. Feeding system manufacturers have introduced changes to the enteral syringe design to improve fat delivery that have not yet been evaluated in the literature.
METHODS
METHODS
This study compares percentage delivery of fat from EBM using 2 major enteral feeding systems in various configurations with silicone and polyurethane tubing material and ENFit and Legacy connection systems at 3 clinically relevant infusion rates.
RESULTS
RESULTS
The percent of fat delivery from EBM was significantly higher for the eccentric syringe system than the concentric system (P = 0.036) but did not vary significantly across infusion rates (P = 0.081). Silicone tubing had a significantly higher percent of fat delivery than polyurethane tubing within the eccentric syringe system (P = 0.039) but did not vary significantly across infusion rates (P = 0.105). There was no significant difference between ENFit and Legacy connectors using eccentric syringes with silicone tubing (P = 0.360).
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
We demonstrate that changes to syringe design and tubing material are effective and improve fat delivery from EBM, which may result in improved growth and outcomes in premature infants. The eccentric syringe marginally improves fat delivery in comparison with the concentric syringe, and silicone tubing significantly improves fat delivery compared with polyurethane tubing.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31713294
doi: 10.1002/ncp.10436
pmc: PMC7383482
doi:
Substances chimiques
Dietary Fats
0
Polyurethanes
0
Silicones
0
Types de publication
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
697-702Informations de copyright
© 2019 The Authors. Nutrition in Clinical Practice published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition.
Références
Acta Paediatr. 2013 Mar;102(3):242-8
pubmed: 23167480
J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater. 2009 Oct;91(1):135-42
pubmed: 19399855
Nutrients. 2010 Mar;2(3):230-40
pubmed: 22254018
Biomaterials. 2004 Mar-Apr;25(7-8):1421-8
pubmed: 14643617
Pediatr Neonatol. 2014 Feb;55(1):5-13
pubmed: 24050843
Nutrients. 2015 Jul 29;7(8):6213-23
pubmed: 26230707
Arch Dis Child. 1984 May;59(5):475-7
pubmed: 6428328
Semin Fetal Neonatal Med. 2017 Feb;22(1):8-14
pubmed: 27599697
Nutrients. 2015 Feb 11;7(2):1174-83
pubmed: 25679230
Pediatr Clin North Am. 2013 Feb;60(1):49-74
pubmed: 23178060
J Pediatr. 1984 Nov;105(5):745-9
pubmed: 6438286
J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr. 1987 Jul-Aug;6(4):593-7
pubmed: 3123636
PLoS One. 2015 Sep 24;10(9):e0139014
pubmed: 26402326
Best Pract Res Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2018 Jan;32(1):57-68
pubmed: 29549961
Arch Dis Child. 1985 Feb;60(2):164-6
pubmed: 3919654
Semin Perinatol. 2003 Aug;27(4):302-10
pubmed: 14510321