Diet, growth, and bone mineralization in premature infants

Protein supplementation of human milk for promoting growth in preterm infants

BACKGROUND

Preterm infants require high protein intake to achieve adequate growth and development. Although breast milk feeding has many benefits for this population, the protein content is highly variable, and inadequate to support rapid infant growth. This is a 2020 update of a Cochrane Review first published in 1999.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether protein-supplemented human milk compared with unsupplemented human milk, fed to preterm infants, improves growth, body composition, cardio-metabolic, and neurodevelopmental outcomes, without significant adverse effects.

SEARCH METHODS

We used the standard search strategy of Cochrane Neonatal to search Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2019, Issue 8) in the Cochrane Library and MEDLINE via PubMed on 23 August 2019. We also searched clinical trials databases and the reference lists of retrieved articles for randomised controlled trials and quasi-randomised trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Published and unpublished RCTs were eligible if they used random or quasi-random methods to allocate hospitalised preterm infants who were being fed human milk, to additional protein supplementation or no supplementation.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently abstracted data, assessed risk of bias and the quality of evidence at the outcome level, using GRADE methodology. We performed meta-analyses, using risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous data, and mean difference (MD) for continuous data, with their respective 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We used a fixed-effect model and had planned to explore potential causes of heterogeneity via subgroup or sensitivity analyses.

MAIN RESULTS

We included six RCTs, involving 204 preterm infants. The risk of bias for most methodological domains was unclear as there was insufficient detail reported. Low-quality evidence showed that protein supplementation of human milk may increase in-hospital rates of growth in weight (MD 3.82 g/kg/day, 95% CI 2.94 to 4.7; five RCTs, 101 infants; I² = 73%), length (MD 0.12 cm/wk, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.17; four RCTs, 68 infants; I² = 89%), and head circumference (MD 0.06 cm/wk, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.12; four RCTs, 68 infants; I² = 84%). Protein supplementation may lead to longer hospital stays (MD 18.5 days, 95% CI 4.39 to 32.61; one RCT, 20 infants; very low-quality evidence). Very low quality evidence means that the effect of protein supplementation on the risk of feeding intolerance (RR 2.70, 95% CI 0.13 to 58.24; one RCT, 17 infants), or necrotizing enterocolitis (RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.07 to 17.12; one RCT, 76 infants) remains uncertain. No data were available about the effects of protein supplementation on neurodevelopmental outcomes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Low-quality evidence showed that protein supplementation of human milk, fed to preterm infants, increased short-term growth. However, the small sample sizes, low precision, and very low-quality evidence regarding duration of hospital stay, feeding intolerance, and necrotising enterocolitis precluded any conclusions about these outcomes. There were no data on outcomes after hospital discharge. Our findings may not be generalisable to low-resource settings, as none of the included studies were conducted in these settings. Since protein supplementation of human milk is now usually done as a component of multi-nutrient fortifiers, future studies should compare different amounts of protein in multi-component fortifiers, and be designed to determine the effects on duration of hospital stay and safety, as well as on long-term growth, body composition, cardio-metabolic, and neurodevelopmental outcomes.

Multi-nutrient fortification of human milk for preterm infants

BACKGROUND

Human breast milk-fed preterm infants can accumulate nutrient deficits leading to extrauterine growth restriction. Feeding preterm infants with multi-nutrient fortified human milk could increase nutrient accretion and growth rates and improve neurodevelopmental outcomes. Concern exists, however, that multi-nutrient fortifiers are associated with adverse events such as feed intolerance and necrotising enterocolitis.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether multi-nutrient fortified human milk, compared with unfortified human milk, affects important outcomes (including growth rate and neurodevelopment) of preterm infants without increasing the risk of adverse effects (such as feed intolerance and necrotising enterocolitis).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2019, Issue 9), MEDLINE via PubMed (1966 to 26 September 2019), Embase (1980 to 26 September 2019), and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL; 1982 to 26 September 2019). We searched clinical trials databases, conference proceedings, and reference lists of retrieved articles for randomised controlled trials and quasi-randomised trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials that compared feeding preterm infants with multi-nutrient (protein and energy plus minerals, vitamins, or other nutrients) fortified human breast milk versus unfortified (no added protein or energy) breast milk.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used the standard methods of Cochrane Neonatal. Two review authors separately evaluated trial quality, extracted data, and synthesised effect estimates using risk ratios (RRs), risk differences, and mean differences (MDs). We assessed the certainty of the body of evidence at the outcome level using "Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation" (GRADE) methods.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 18 trials in which a total of 1456 preterm infants participated. These trials were generally small and methodologically weak. Meta-analyses provided low- to moderate-certainty evidence showing that multi-nutrient fortification of human milk increases in-hospital rate of weight gain (MD 1.76 g/kg/d, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.30 to 2.22), body length (MD 0.11 cm/week, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.15), or head circumference (MD 0.06 cm/week, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.08) among preterm infants. Few data on growth and developmental outcomes assessed beyond infancy are available, and these do not show effects of multi-nutrient fortification. The data do not suggest other benefits or harms and provide low-certainty evidence suggesting effects of multi-nutrient fortification on the risk of necrotising enterocolitis in preterm infants (typical RR 1.37, 95% CI 0.72 to 2.63; 13 studies, 1110 infants).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Feeding preterm infants with multi-nutrient fortified human breast milk compared with unfortified human breast milk is associated with modest increases in in-hospital growth rates. Evidence is insufficient to show whether multi-nutrient fortification has any effect on long-term growth or neurodevelopment.

Protein supplementation of human milk for promoting growth in preterm infants

BACKGROUND

Preterm infants require high protein intake to achieve adequate growth and development. Although breast milk feeding has many benefits for this population, the protein content is highly variable, and inadequate to support rapid infant growth. This is a 2018 update of a Cochrane Review first published in 1999.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether protein-supplemented human milk compared with unsupplemented human milk, fed to preterm infants, improves growth, body composition, cardio-metabolic, and neurodevelopmental outcomes, without significant adverse effects.

SEARCH METHODS

We used the standard search strategy of Cochrane Neonatal to search CENTRAL, MEDLINE via PubMed, Embase, and CINAHL (February 2018). We also searched clinical trials databases, conference proceedings and the reference lists of retrieved articles for randomised controlled trials (RCT) and quasi-randomised trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Published and unpublished RCTs were eligible if they used random or quasi-random methods to allocate hospitalised preterm infants who were being fed human milk, to additional protein supplementation or no supplementation.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently abstracted data, assessed risk of bias and the quality of evidence at the outcome level, using GRADE methodology. We performed meta-analyses, using risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous data, and mean difference (MD) for continuous data, with their respective 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We used a fixed-effect model and had planned to explore potential causes of heterogeneity via subgroup or sensitivity analyses.

MAIN RESULTS

We included six RCTs, involving 204 preterm infants. Low-quality evidence showed that protein supplementation of human milk increased in-hospital rates of growth in weight (MD 3.82 g/kg/day, 95% CI 2.94 to 4.7; five RCTs, 101 infants; I² = 73%), length (MD 0.12 cm/wk, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.17; four RCTs, 68 infants; I² = 89%), and head circumference (MD 0.06 cm/wk, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.12; four RCTs, 68 infants; I² = 84%). There was no evidence of a clear difference in rate of growth of skin fold thickness between the supplemented and unsupplemented groups (triceps MD 0.06 mm/wk, 95% CI -0.09 to 0.21; one RCT, 20 infants; or subscapular MD 0.00 mm/wk, 95% CI -0.17 to 0.17; one RCT, 20 infants). Protein supplementation led to longer hospital stays (MD 18.5 days, 95% CI 4.39 to 32.61; one RCT, 20 infants; very low-quality evidence), and higher blood urea nitrogen concentrations compared to the unsupplemented group (MD 0.95 mmol/L, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.09; four RCTs, 81 infants; I² = 56%). Very low-quality evidence did not show that protein supplementation clearly increased the risk of feeding intolerance (RR 2.70, 95% CI 0.13 to 58.24; one RCT, 17 infants), or necrotizing enterocolitis (RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.07 to 17.12; one RCT, 76 infants), or clearly altered serum albumin concentrations (MD 2.5 g/L, 95% CI -5.66 to 10.66; one RCT, 11 infants), compared with the unsupplemented groups. No data were available about the effects of protein supplementation on long-term growth, body mass index, body composition, neurodevelopmental, or cardio-metabolic outcomes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Low-quality evidence showed that protein supplementation of human milk, fed to preterm infants, increased short-term growth. However, the small sample sizes, low precision, and very low-quality evidence regarding duration of hospital stay, feeding intolerance, and necrotising enterocolitis precluded any conclusions about these outcomes. There were no data on outcomes after hospital discharge. Our findings may not be generalisable to low-resource settings, as none of the included studies were conducted in these settings.Since protein supplementation of human milk is now usually done as a component of multi-nutrient fortifiers, future studies should compare different amounts of protein in multi-component fortifiers, and be designed to determine the effects on duration of hospital stay and safety, as well as on long-term growth, body composition, cardio-metabolic, and neurodevelopmental outcomes.

Multi-nutrient fortification of human milk for preterm infants

BACKGROUND

Exclusively breast milk-fed preterm infants may accumulate nutrient deficits leading to extrauterine growth restriction. Feeding preterm infants with multi-nutrient fortified human breast milk rather than unfortified breast milk may increase nutrient accretion and growth rates and may improve neurodevelopmental outcomes.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether multi-nutrient fortified human breast milk improves important outcomes (including growth and development) over unfortified breast milk for preterm infants without increasing the risk of adverse effects (such as feed intolerance and necrotising enterocolitis).

SEARCH METHODS

We used the standard search strategy of the Cochrane Neonatal Review Group. This included electronic searches of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2016, Issue 2), MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) (until February 2016), as well as conference proceedings and previous reviews.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials that compared feeding preterm infants with multi-nutrient (protein and energy plus minerals, vitamins or other nutrients) fortified human breast milk versus unfortified (no added protein or energy) breast milk.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We extracted data using the standard methods of the Cochrane Neonatal Review Group. We separately evaluated trial quality, data extracted by two review authors and data synthesised using risk ratios (RRs), risk differences and mean differences (MDs). We assessed the quality of evidence at the outcome level using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 14 trials in which a total of 1071 infants participated. The trials were generally small and weak methodologically. Meta-analyses provided low-quality evidence that multi-nutrient fortification of breast milk increases in-hospital rates of growth (MD 1.81 g/kg/d, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.23 to 2.40); length (MD 0.12 cm/wk, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.17); and head circumference (MD 0.08 cm/wk, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.12). Only very limited data are available for growth and developmental outcomes assessed beyond infancy, and these show no effects of fortification. The data did not indicate other potential benefits or harms and provided low-quality evidence that fortification does not increase the risk of necrotising enterocolitis in preterm infants (typical RR 1.57, 95% CI 0.76 to 3.23; 11 studies, 882 infants).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Limited available data do not provide strong evidence that feeding preterm infants with multi-nutrient fortified breast milk compared with unfortified breast milk affects important outcomes, except that it leads to slightly increased in-hospital growth rates.

Areal bone mineral density of the lumbar spine in 80 premature newborns: a prospective and longitudinal study

BACKGROUND

Maximum bone mass accretion in the fetal skeleton is acquired during the third trimester of gestation, and may be compromised in premature newborns.

OBJECTIVE

To ascertain the incidence and evolution of osteopenia, a longitudinal study was performed to evaluate areal bone mineral density (aBMD) in the lumbar spine in premature newborns followed during the first 2 years of life.

METHODS

aBMD values were assessed in lumbar spine (L2-L4) by DEXA and expressed as grams hydroxyapatite/cm2 in 80 premature newborns, 41 boys and 39 girls, of gestational ages 24.5-35.7 weeks. aBMD values were evaluated at (mean+/-SD) 0.2+/-0.1 years (at discharge from the neonatal unit), 0.9+/-0.2 years and 2.0+/-0.5 years of postnatal age, and compared with those of age- and sex-matched full-term newborns with normal intrauterine and postnatal growth.

RESULTS

aBMD values recovered progressively from the first to the third evaluations, and were 0.139+/-0.06 g/cm2 (-2.4+/-1.4 SDS) at 0.2+/-0.1, 0.270+/-0.06 g/cm2 (-1.0+/-1.0 SDS) at 0.9+/-0.2 and 0.410 g/cm2 (-0.08+/-1.0 SDS) at 2.0+/-0.5 years.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data show a significant catch-up of aBMD, reaching values similar to those of full-term newborns at the age of 0.2+/-0.5 years, regardless of the gestational age at birth.

Multicomponent fortified human milk for promoting growth in preterm infants

BACKGROUND

For term infants, human milk provides adequate nutrition to facilitate growth, as well as potential beneficial effects on immunity and the maternal-infant emotional state. However, the role of human milk in premature infants is less well defined as it contains insufficient quantities of some nutrients to meet the estimated needs of the infant. Observational studies have suggested that infants fed formula have a higher rate of growth than infants who are breast fed. However, there are potential short term and long term benefits from human milk. Commercially-produced multicomponent fortifiers provide additional nutrients to supplement human milk (in the form of protein, calcium, phosphate, and carbohydrate, as well as vitamins and trace minerals).

OBJECTIVES

The main objective was to determine if addition of multicomponent nutritional supplements to human milk leads to improved growth, bone metabolism and neurodevelopmental outcomes without significant adverse effects in premature infants.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Searches were made of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, The Cochrane Library, Issue 2, 3003), MEDLINE (searched August 29, 2003), previous reviews including cross references, abstracts, conferences and symposia proceedings, expert informants, journal handsearching mainly in the English language.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All trials utilising random or quasi-random allocation to supplementation of human milk with multiple nutrients or no supplementation in premature infants within a nursery setting were eligible.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were extracted using the standard methods of the Cochrane Collaboration and its Neonatal Review Group, with separate evaluation of trial quality and data extraction by each author and synthesis of data using relative risk and weighted mean difference.

MAIN RESULTS

Supplementation of human milk with multicomponent fortifiers is associated with short term increases in weight gain, linear and head growth. There is no effect on serum alkaline phosphatase levels; it is not clear if there is an effect on bone mineral content. Nitrogen retention and blood urea levels appear to be increased. There are insufficient data to evaluate long term neurodevelopmental and growth outcomes, although there appears to be no effect on growth beyond one year of life. Use of multicomponent fortifiers does not appear to be associated with adverse effects, although the total number of infants studied and the large amount of missing data reduces confidence in this conclusion. Blood urea levels are increased and blood pH levels minimally decreased, but the clinical significance of this is uncertain.

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

Multicomponent fortification of human milk is associated with short-term improvements in weight gain, linear and head growth. Despite the absence of evidence of long-term benefit and insufficient evidence to be reassured that there are no deleterious effects, it is unlikely that further studies evaluating fortification of human milk versus no supplementation will be performed. Further research should be directed toward comparisons between different proprietary preparations and evaluating both short-term and long-term outcomes in search of the "optimal" composition of fortifiers.