Dilemmas initiating enteral feedings in high risk infants: how can they be resolved?

The Practice of Enteral Nutrition: Clinical Evidence for Feeding Protocols

Establishing full enteral nutrition in critically ill preterm infants with immature gastrointestinal function is challenging. In this article, we will summarize emerging clinical evidence from randomized clinical trials suggesting the feasibility and efficacy of feeding interventions targeting the early establishment of full enteral nutrition. We will also examine trial outcomes of higher volume feedings after the establishment of full enteral nutrition. Only data from randomized clinical trials will be discussed extensively. Future opportunities for clinical research will also be presented.

Delayed introduction of progressive enteral feeds to prevent necrotising enterocolitis in very low birth weight infants

BACKGROUND

Enteral feeding for very preterm or very low birth weight (VLBW) infants is often delayed for several days after birth due to concern that early introduction of feeding may not be tolerated and may increase the risk of necrotising enterocolitis. Concerns exist, however, that delaying enteral feeding may diminish the functional adaptation of the gastrointestinal tract and prolong the need for parenteral nutrition with its attendant infectious and metabolic risks.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effects of delayed introduction of progressive enteral feeds on the risk of necrotising enterocolitis, mortality and other morbidities in very preterm or VLBW infants.

SEARCH METHODS

Search strategies were developed by an information specialist in consultation with the review authors. The following databases were searched in October 2021 without date or language restrictions: CENTRAL (2021, Issue 10), MEDLINE via OVID (1946 to October 2021), Embase via OVID (1974 to October 2021), Maternity and Infant Care via OVID (1971 to October 2021), CINAHL (1982 to October 2021). We also searched for eligible trials in clinical trials databases, conference proceedings, previous reviews, and reference lists of retrieved articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials that assessed the effects of delayed (four or more days after birth) versus earlier introduction of progressive enteral feeds on necrotising enterocolitis, mortality and other morbidities in very preterm or VLBW infants.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors separately evaluated trial risk of bias, extracted data, and synthesised effect estimates using risk ratio (RR), risk difference (RD), and mean difference. We used the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of evidence for effects on necrotising enterocolitis, mortality,  feed intolerance, and invasive infection.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 14 trials in which a total of 1551 infants participated. Potential sources of bias were lack of clarity on methods to generate random sequences and conceal allocation in half of the trials, and lack of masking of caregivers or investigators in all of the trials. Trials typically defined delayed introduction of progressive enteral feeds as later than four to seven days after birth and early introduction as four days or fewer after birth. Infants in six trials (accounting for about half of all of the participants) had intrauterine growth restriction or circulatory redistribution demonstrated by absent or reversed end-diastolic flow velocities in the fetal aorta or umbilical artery.  Meta-analyses showed that delayed introduction of progressive enteral feeds may not reduce the risk of necrotising enterocolitis (RR 0.81, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.58 to 1.14; RD -0.02, 95% CI -0.04 to 0.01; 13 trials, 1507 infants; low-certainty evidence due risk of bias and imprecision) nor all-cause mortality before hospital discharge (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.36; RD -0.00, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.03; 12 trials, 1399 infants; low-certainty evidence due risk of bias and imprecision). Delayed introduction of progressive enteral feeds may slightly reduce the risk of feed intolerance (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.68 to 0.97; RD -0.09, 95% CI -0.17 to -0.02; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome = 11, 95% CI 6 to 50; 6 trials, 581 infants; low-certainty evidence due to risk of bias and imprecision) and probably increases the risk of invasive infection (RR 1.44, 95% CI 1.15 to 1.80; RD 0.10, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.15; number needed to treat for a harmful outcome = 10, 95% CI 7 to 25; 7 trials, 872 infants; moderate-certainty evidence due to risk of bias).  AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Delaying the introduction of progressive enteral feeds beyond four days after birth (compared with earlier introduction) may not reduce the risk of necrotising enterocolitis or death in very preterm or VLBW infants. Delayed introduction may slightly reduce feed intolerance, and probably increases the risk of invasive infection.

Slow advancement of enteral feed volumes to prevent necrotising enterocolitis in very low birth weight infants

BACKGROUND

Early enteral feeding practices are potentially modifiable risk factors for necrotising enterocolitis (NEC) in very preterm or very low birth weight (VLBW) infants. Observational studies suggest that conservative feeding regimens, including slowly advancing enteral feed volumes, reduce the risk of NEC. However, it is unclear whether slow feed advancement may delay establishment of full enteral feeding, and if it could be associated with infectious morbidities secondary to prolonged exposure to parenteral nutrition.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effects of slow rates of enteral feed advancement on the risk of NEC, mortality, and other morbidities in very preterm or VLBW infants.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL (2020, Issue 10), Ovid MEDLINE (1946 to October 2020), Embase via Ovid (1974 to October 2020), Maternity and Infant Care database (MIDIRS) (1971 to October 2020), CINAHL (1982 to October 2020), and clinical trials databases and reference lists of retrieved articles for eligible trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials that assessed effects of slow (up to 24 mL/kg/d) versus faster rates of advancement of enteral feed volumes on the risk of NEC in very preterm or VLBW infants.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors separately evaluated trial risk of bias, extracted data, and synthesised effect estimates using risk ratio (RR), risk difference (RD), and mean difference. We used the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of evidence. Outcomes of interest were NEC, all-cause mortality, feed intolerance, and invasive infection.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 14 trials involving a total of 4033 infants (2804 infants participated in one large trial). None of the trials masked parents, caregivers, or investigators. Risk of bias was otherwise low. Most infants were stable very preterm or VLBW infants of birth weight appropriate for gestation. About one-third of all infants were extremely preterm or extremely low birth weight (ELBW), and about one-fifth were small for gestational age, growth-restricted, or compromised as indicated by absent or reversed end-diastolic flow velocity in the foetal umbilical artery. Trials typically defined slow advancement as daily increments of 15 to 24 mL/kg, and faster advancement as daily increments of 30 to 40 mL/kg. Meta-analyses showed that slow advancement of enteral feed volumes probably has little or no effect on the risk of NEC (RR 1.06, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.83 to 1.37; RD 0.00, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.02; 14 trials, 4026 infants; moderate-certainty evidence) or all-cause mortality prior to hospital discharge (RR 1.13, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.39; RD 0.01, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.02; 13 trials, 3860 infants; moderate-certainty evidence). Meta-analyses suggested that slow advancement may slightly increase feed intolerance (RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.46; RD 0.05, 95% CI -0.02 to 0.12; 9 trials, 719 infants; low-certainty evidence) and may slightly increase the risk of invasive infection (RR 1.14, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.31; RD 0.02, 95% CI -0.00 to 0.05; 11 trials, 3583 infants; low-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The available trial data indicate that advancing enteral feed volumes slowly (daily increments up to 24 mL/kg) compared with faster rates probably does not reduce the risk of NEC, death, or feed intolerance in very preterm or VLBW infants. Advancing the volume of enteral feeds at a slow rate may slightly increase the risk of invasive infection.

Effectiveness and Safety of Fast Enteral Advancement in Preterm Infants Between 1000 and 2000 g of Birth Weight

BACKGROUND

The advancement of enteral nutrition in premature infants is still controversial. Clinicians must provide adequate caloric intake but avoiding feeding intolerance and necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC). The aim of this study was to establish the safety and effectiveness of fast enteral advancement by comparing it with traditional advancement.

METHODS

This is a controlled randomized clinical trial. Feeding was advanced at 30 mL/kg/d vs 20 mL/kg/d in premature infants under 34 weeks between 1000 and 1499g birth weight, and at 40 mL/kg/d vs 20 mL/kg/day in those weighing 1500-1999 g. Outcomes included time to reach total enteral nutrition, days of parenteral nutrition (PN) and/or intravenous fluid (IVF), days to recover birth weight, episodes of feeding intolerance, growth and weight gain at 40 weeks, sepsis, hypoglycemia, hyperbilirubinemia, NEC, and mortality. Student t-test or Mann-Whitney U test, Fisher test or χ² test, and multiple linear regression were used.

RESULTS

Differences were found in days to reach total enteral nutrition (slow: 7 [IQR(interquartile range), 6-9], fast: 4 [IQR, 4-6]; P < .001) and days of IVF or PN (slow: 6 [IQR, 4-8], fast: 3 [IQR, 3-5]; P < .001). Fast advancement decreases time to total enteral nutrition by 3 days and PN and/or IVF by up to 5 days. There were no differences in other outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Fast enteral advancement decreases the days to reach total enteral nutrition and the days of PN and/or IVF without causing greater feeding intolerance. Additional studies are required for more evidence.

Slow advancement of enteral feed volumes to prevent necrotising enterocolitis in very low birth weight infants

BACKGROUND

Early enteral feeding practices are potentially modifiable risk factors for necrotising enterocolitis (NEC) in very preterm or very low birth weight (VLBW) infants. Observational studies suggest that conservative feeding regimens, including slowly advancing enteral feed volumes, reduce the risk of NEC. However, slow feed advancement may delay establishment of full enteral feeding and may be associated with metabolic and infectious morbidities secondary to prolonged exposure to parenteral nutrition.

OBJECTIVES

To determine effects of slow rates of enteral feed advancement on the incidence of NEC, mortality, and other morbidities in very preterm or VLBW infants.

SEARCH METHODS

We used the standard Cochrane Neonatal search strategy to search the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2017, Issue 5), MEDLINE via PubMed (1966 to June 2017), Embase (1980 to June 2017), and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL; 1982 to June 2017). We searched clinical trials databases, conference proceedings, previous reviews, and reference lists of retrieved articles for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-randomised trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials that assessed effects of slow (up to 24 mL/kg/d) versus faster rates of advancement of enteral feed volumes upon the incidence of NEC in very preterm or VLBW infants.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors assessed trial eligibility and risk of bias and independently extracted data. We analysed treatment effects in individual trials and reported risk ratio (RR) and risk difference (RD) for dichotomous data, and mean difference (MD) for continuous data, with respective 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We used a fixed-effect model for meta-analyses and explored potential causes of heterogeneity via sensitivity analyses. 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 10 RCTs in which a total of 3753 infants participated (2804 infants participated in one large trial). Most participants were stable very preterm infants of birth weight appropriate for gestation. About one-third of all participants were extremely preterm or extremely low birth weight (ELBW), and about one-fifth were small for gestational age (SGA), growth-restricted, or compromised in utero, as indicated by absent or reversed end-diastolic flow velocity (AREDFV) in the fetal umbilical artery. Trials typically defined slow advancement as daily increments of 15 to 20 mL/kg, and faster advancement as daily increments of 30 to 40 mL/kg. Trials generally were of good methodological quality, although none was blinded.Meta-analyses did not show effects on risk of NEC (typical RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.39; RD 0.0, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.02) or all-cause mortality (typical RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.42; typical RD 0.01, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.03). Subgroup analyses of extremely preterm or ELBW infants, or of SGA or growth-restricted or growth-compromised infants, showed no evidence of an effect on risk of NEC or death. Slow feed advancement delayed establishment of full enteral nutrition by between about one and five days. Meta-analysis showed borderline increased risk of invasive infection (typical RR 1.15, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.32; typical RD 0.03, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.05). The GRADE quality of evidence for primary outcomes was "moderate", downgraded from "high" because of lack of blinding in the included trials.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Available trial data do not provide evidence that advancing enteral feed volumes at daily increments of 15 to 20 mL/kg (compared with 30 to 40 mL/kg) reduces the risk of NEC or death in very preterm or VLBW infants, extremely preterm or ELBW infants, SGA or growth-restricted infants, or infants with antenatal AREDFV. Advancing the volume of enteral feeds at a slow rate results in several days of delay in establishing full enteral feeds and may increase the risk of invasive infection.

Nutritional practices and postnatal growth restriction in preterm newborns

OBJECTIVE

to assess the nutritional practices in neonatal intensive care units (NICU) associated with growth retardation in premature (preterm) infants.

METHODS

retrospective study of preterm infants weighing between 500 and 1,499 g admitted to NICU. Evolution of growth and parenteral (PN) and enteral (EN) nutrition practices were analyzed.

RESULTS

among 184 preterm infants divided into G1 (500 to 990 g; n=63) and G2 (1000 to 1499 g; n=121), 169 received PN (G1=63, G2=106). Compared with the recommendations, PN was started late, its progress was slow and the maximum glucose, amino acid, lipid and energy supplies were low in both groups. The initial supply of amino acid and lipid and initial and maximum glucose and energy were lower in G1. The onset of EN was early (1-2 days), the time to reach exclusive EN was appropriate (11-15 days) and the use of human milk was possible in a reasonable amount of time (7-13 days). The multivariate analysis showed that respiratory distress syndrome and obtaining a supply of 120 kcal/kg/day too late increased the chance of weight loss greater than 10%. Sepsis, maximum energy supply for PN <60 kcal/kg/day and obtaining a supply of 120 kcal/kg/day too late increased the chance of regaining birth weight after 14 days, while small for gestational age (SGA) at birth reduced this chance. SGA at birth, sepsis and achieving exclusive enteral nutrition after 14 days increased the chance of being SGA at post-conceptual age of term.

CONCLUSION

improving nutritional practices in the NICU can reduce the growth deficit in premature infants of very low birth weight.

Slow advancement of enteral feed volumes to prevent necrotising enterocolitis in very low birth weight infants

BACKGROUND

Early enteral feeding practices are potentially modifiable risk factors for necrotising enterocolitis (NEC) in very preterm or very low birth weight (VLBW) infants. Observational studies suggest that conservative feeding regimens, including slowly advancing enteral feed volumes, reduce the risk of NEC. However, slow feed advancement may delay establishment of full enteral feeding and be associated with metabolic and infectious morbidities secondary to prolonged exposure to parenteral nutrition.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effect of slow rates of enteral feed advancement on the incidence of NEC, mortality, and other morbidities in very preterm or VLBW infants.

SEARCH METHODS

We used the standard search strategy of the Cochrane Neonatal Review group to search the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2015, Issue 7), MEDLINE via PubMed (1966 to August 2015), EMBASE (1980 to August 2015), and CINAHL (1982 to August 2015). We also searched clinical trials databases, conference proceedings, previous reviews, and the reference lists of retrieved articles for randomised controlled trials and quasi-randomised trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials that assessed the effect of slow (up to 24 mL/kg/day) versus faster rates of advancement of enteral feed volumes upon the incidence of NEC in very preterm or VLBW infants.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trial eligibility and risk of bias and undertook data extraction. We analysed the treatment effects in the individual trials and reported the risk ratio (RR) and risk difference (RD) for dichotomous data and mean difference for continuous data, with respective 95% confidence intervals (CI). We used a fixed-effect model in meta-analyses and explored the potential causes of heterogeneity in sensitivity analyses.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified nine randomised controlled trials in which 949 infants participated. Most participants were stable preterm infants with birth weights between 1000 and 1500 g. Fewer participants were extremely preterm, extremely low birth weight, or growth-restricted. The trials typically defined slow advancement as daily increments of 15 to 24 mL/kg and faster advancement as 30 to 40 mL/kg. Meta-analyses did not show statistically significant effects on the risk of NEC (typical RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.62; typical RD -0.00, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.03) or all-cause mortality (typical RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.53; typical RD 0.03, 95% CI -0.02 to 0.08). Slow feeds advancement delayed the establishment of full enteral nutrition by one to five days and increased the risk of invasive infection (typical RR 1.46, 95% CI 1.03 to 2.06; typical RD 0.07, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.13; number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome 14, 95% CI 8 to 100).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The available trial data suggest that advancing enteral feed volumes at daily increments of 30 to 40 mL/kg (compared to 15 to 24 mL/kg) does not increase the risk of NEC or death in VLBW infants. Advancing the volume of enteral feeds at slow rates results in several days of delay in establishing full enteral feeds and increases the risk of invasive infection. The applicability of these findings to extremely preterm, extremely low birth weight, or growth-restricted infants is limited. Further randomised controlled trials in these populations may be warranted to resolve this uncertainty.

Delayed introduction of progressive enteral feeds to prevent necrotising enterocolitis in very low birth weight infants

BACKGROUND

The introduction of enteral feeds for very preterm (less than 32 weeks' gestation) or very low birth weight (VLBW; less than 1500 g) infants is often delayed for several days or longer after birth due to concern that early introduction may not be tolerated and may increase the risk of necrotising enterocolitis (NEC). However, delaying enteral feeding could diminish the functional adaptation of the gastrointestinal tract and prolong the need for parenteral nutrition with its attendant infectious and metabolic risks.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effect of delayed introduction of progressive enteral feeds on the incidence of NEC, mortality and other morbidities in very preterm or VLBW infants.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, 2014, Issue 8), MEDLINE (1966 to September 2014), EMBASE (1980 to September 2014), CINAHL (1982 to September 2014), conference proceedings and previous reviews.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials that assessed the effect of delayed (more than four days after birth) versus earlier introduction of progressive enteral feeds on the incidence of NEC, mortality and other morbidities in very preterm or VLBW infants.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trial eligibility and risk of bias and undertook data extraction. We analysed the treatment effects in the individual trials and reported the risk ratio (RR) and risk difference for dichotomous data and mean difference for continuous data, with respective 95% confidence intervals (CI). We used a fixed-effect model in meta-analyses and explored the potential causes of heterogeneity in sensitivity analyses.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified nine randomised controlled trials in which 1106 infants participated. Few participants were extremely preterm (less 28 weeks' gestation) or extremely low birth weight (less than 1000 g). The trials defined delayed introduction of progressive enteral feeds as later than four to seven days after birth and early introduction as four days or less after birth. Meta-analyses did not detect statistically significant effects on the risk of NEC (typical RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.34; 8 trials; 1092 infants) or all-cause mortality (typical RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.88; 7 trials; 967 infants). Four of the trials restricted participation to growth-restricted infants with Doppler ultrasound evidence of abnormal fetal circulatory distribution or flow. Planned subgroup analyses of these trials found no statistically significant effects on the risk of NEC or all-cause mortality. Infants who had delayed introduction of enteral feeds took longer to establish full enteral feeding (reported median differences two to four days).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The evidence available from randomised controlled trials suggested that delaying the introduction of progressive enteral feeds beyond four days after birth did not reduce the risk of developing NEC in very preterm or VLBW infants, including growth-restricted infants. Delaying the introduction of progressive enteral feeds resulted in a few days' delay in establishing full enteral feeds but the clinical importance of this effect was unclear. The applicability of these findings to extremely preterm or extremely low birth weight was uncertain. Further randomised controlled trials in this population may be warranted.

Management during the first 72 h of age of the periviable infant: an evidence-based review

After NICU admission the extremely immature newborn (EIN) requires evaluation and support of each organ system, and the integration of all those supports in a comprehensive plan of care. In this review, I attempt to analyze the evidence for treatment options after the initial transition, during the first 3 days of life, which have been shown to improve survival or short- or long-term morbidity. This review revealed several things: there is little available evidence from studies that have included significant numbers of EINs; interventions affecting different organ systems need to be co-ordinated as any intervention will have multiple effects; and future advances in treatment of this group of patients will require the installation of permanent research networks to have enough power to perform many studies needed to improve outcomes.

Slow advancement of enteral feed volumes to prevent necrotising enterocolitis in very low birth weight infants

BACKGROUND

Early enteral feeding practices are potentially modifiable risk factors for necrotising enterocolitis in very preterm or very low birth weight (VLBW) infants. Observational studies suggest that conservative feeding regimens, including slowly advancing enteral feed volumes, reduce the risk of necrotising enterocolitis. However, slow feed advancement may delay establishment of full enteral feeding and be associated with metabolic and infectious morbidities secondary to prolonged exposure to parenteral nutrition.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effect of slow rates of enteral feed advancement on the incidence of necrotising enterocolitis, mortality, and other morbidities in very preterm or VLBW infants.

SEARCH METHODS

We used the standard search strategy of the Cochrane Neonatal Review Group Specialised Register. We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2014, Issue 8), MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL (to September 2014), conference proceedings, and previous reviews.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials that assessed the effect of slow (up to 24 ml/kg per day) versus faster rates of advancement of enteral feed volumes upon the incidence of necrotising enterocolitis in very preterm or VLBW infants.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trial eligibility and risk of bias and undertook data extraction. We analysed the treatment effects in the individual trials and reported the risk ratio and risk difference for dichotomous data and mean difference for continuous data, with respective 95% confidence intervals. We used a fixed-effect model in meta-analyses and explored the potential causes of heterogeneity in sensitivity analyses.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified six randomised controlled trials in which a total of 618 infants participated. Most participants were stable preterm infants of birth weight between 1000 g and 1500 g. Few participants were extremely preterm, extremely low birth weight, or growth-restricted. The trials typically defined slow advancement as daily increments of 15 ml/kg to 20 ml/kg and faster advancement as 30 ml/kg to 35 ml/kg. Meta-analyses did not detect statistically significant effects on the risk of necrotising enterocolitis (typical risk ratio (RR) 0.96, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.55 to 1.70) or all-cause mortality (typical RR 1.57, 95% CI 0.92 to 2.70). Infants who had slow advancement took significantly longer to regain birth weight (reported median differences 2 to 6 days) and to establish full enteral feeding (1 to 5 days).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The available trial data suggest that advancing enteral feed volumes at daily increments of 30 ml/kg to 35 ml/kg does not increase the risk of necrotising enterocolitis in very preterm or VLBW infants. Advancing the volume of enteral feeds at slow rates resulted in several days delay in regaining birth weight and establishing full enteral feeds. The applicability of these findings to extremely preterm, extremely low birth weight, or growth-restricted infants is limited. Further randomised controlled trials in these populations may be warranted to resolve this uncertainty.

Feasibility of exclusive enteral feeds from birth in VLBW infants >1200 g--an RCT

AIM

To evaluate the feasibility of initiation of exclusive enteral feeds on first day of life in very low birthweight infants >1200 g.

METHODS

Haemodynamically stable infants with birthweights 1200-1500 g irrespective of gestational age were randomized into two groups.

STUDY GROUP

Enteral feeds 80 mL/kg/day started within 1 h of birth and increased by 20 mL/kg/day to 180 mL/kg/day. No intravenous fluids given.

CONTROL GROUP

Intravenous fluids 50 mL/kg/day started along with enteral feeds 30 mL/kg/day within 1 h of birth and increased by 20 mL/kg/day to 180 mL/kg/day. The outcome measures were - primary: time to regain birthweight and secondary: duration of hospital stay, incidence of necrotizing enterocolitis and sepsis.

RESULTS

Twenty three babies randomized in each group. Infants in study group regained birthweight earlier [mean 5.52 days, SD ± 2.94] compared to those in control group [mean 12.7 days, SD ± 2.25] (p < 0.0001). Duration of hospital stay was lower in study group [mean 15.04 days, SD ± 5.26] compared to those in control group [mean 28.04 days, SD ± 6.76] (p < 0.0001). No necrotizing enterocolitis detected.

CONCLUSION

It is feasible to initiate exclusive enteral feeds from first day of life in stable infants with birthweight between 1200 and 1500 g without any parenteral fluid support. It leads to twice as faster regaining of birthweight and halves duration of hospital stay.

Delayed introduction of progressive enteral feeds to prevent necrotising enterocolitis in very low birth weight infants

BACKGROUND

The introduction of enteral feeds for very preterm (< 32 weeks) or very low birth weight (< 1500 g) infants is often delayed for several days or longer after birth due to concern that early introduction may not be tolerated and may increase the risk of necrotising enterocolitis (NEC). However, delaying enteral feeding could diminish the functional adaptation of the gastrointestinal tract and prolong the need for parenteral nutrition with its attendant infectious and metabolic risks.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effect of delayed introduction of progressive enteral feeds on the incidence of necrotising enterocolitis, mortality and other morbidities in very preterm or very low birth weight infants.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, The Cochrane Library, 2013, Issue 3), MEDLINE (1966 to April 2013), EMBASE (1980 to April 2013), CINAHL (1982 to April 2013), conference proceedings, and previous reviews.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials that assessed the effect of delayed (more than four days after birth) versus earlier introduction of progressive enteral feeds on the incidence of NEC, mortality and other morbidities in very preterm or very low birth weight infants.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We extracted data using the standard methods of the Cochrane Neonatal Review Group, with separate evaluation of trial quality and data extraction by two review authors.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified seven randomised controlled trials in which a total of 964 infants participated. Few participants were extremely preterm (< 28 weeks) or extremely low birth weight (< 1000 g). The trials defined delayed introduction as later than five to seven days after birth and early introduction as less than four days after birth. Meta-analyses did not detect statistically significant effects on the risk of NEC (typical risk ratio (RR) 0.92 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.64 to 1.34) or all-cause mortality (typical RR 1.26 (95% CI 0.78 to 2.01)). Three of the trials restricted participation to growth-restricted infants with Doppler ultrasound evidence of abnormal fetal circulatory distribution or flow. Planned subgroup analyses of these trials did not find any statistically significant effects on the risk of NEC or all-cause mortality. Infants who had delayed introduction of enteral feeds took longer to establish full enteral feeding (reported median difference two to four days).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The evidence available from randomised controlled trials suggests that delaying the introduction of progressive enteral feeds beyond four days after birth does not affect the risk of developing NEC in very preterm or very low birth weight infants, including growth-restricted infants. Delaying the introduction of progressive enteral feeds results in a few days delay in establishing full enteral feeds but the clinical importance of this effect is unclear. The applicability of these findings to extremely preterm or extremely low birth weight is uncertain. Further randomised controlled trials in this population may be warranted.

Slow advancement of enteral feed volumes to prevent necrotising enterocolitis in very low birth weight infants

BACKGROUND

Early enteral feeding practices are potentially modifiable risk factors for necrotising enterocolitis in very preterm or very low birth weight (VLBW) infants. Observational studies suggest that conservative feeding regimens that include slowly advancing enteral feed volumes reduce the risk of necrotising enterocolitis. However, slow feed advancement may delay establishment of full enteral feeding and be associated with metabolic and infectious morbidities secondary to prolonged exposure to parenteral nutrition.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effect of slow rates of enteral feed advancement on the incidence of necrotising enterocolitis, mortality and other morbidities in very preterm or VLBW infants.

SEARCH METHODS

We used the standard search strategy of the Cochrane Neonatal Review Group. We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2012, Issue 12), MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL (to December 2012), conference proceedings, and previous reviews.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials that assessed the effect of slow (up to 24 ml/kg/day) versus faster rates of advancement of enteral feed volumes upon the incidence of necrotising enterocolitis in very preterm or VLBW infants.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data collection and analysis was performed using the standard methods of the Cochrane Neonatal Review Group.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified five randomised controlled trials in which a total of 588 infants participated. Few participants were extremely preterm, extremely low birth weight or growth restricted. The trials defined slow advancement as daily increments of 15 to 20 ml/kg and faster advancement as 30 to 35 ml/kg. Meta-analyses did not detect statistically significant effects on the risk of necrotising enterocolitis (typical risk ratio (RR) 0.97, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.54 to 1.74) or all-cause mortality (RR 1.41, 95% CI 0.81 to 2.74). Infants who had slow advancement took significantly longer to regain birth weight (reported median differences two to six days) and to establish full enteral feeding (two to five days).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The available trial data suggest that advancing enteral feed volumes at slow rather than faster rates does not reduce the risk of necrotising enterocolitis in very preterm or VLBW infants. Advancing the volume of enteral feeds at slow rates results in several days delay in regaining birth weight and establishing full enteral feeds but the long term clinical importance of these effects is unclear. The applicability of these findings to extremely preterm, extremely low birth weight or growth restricted infants is limited. Further randomised controlled trials in these populations may be warranted to resolve this uncertainty.

Early trophic feeding versus enteral fasting for very preterm or very low birth weight infants

BACKGROUND

The introduction of enteral feeds for very preterm (< 32 weeks) or very low birth weight (< 1500 grams) infants is often delayed due to concern that early introduction may not be tolerated and may increase the risk of necrotising enterocolitis. However, prolonged enteral fasting may diminish the functional adaptation of the immature gastrointestinal tract and extend the need for parenteral nutrition with its attendant infectious and metabolic risks. Trophic feeding, giving infants very small volumes of milk to promote intestinal maturation, may enhance feeding tolerance and decrease the time taken to reach full enteral feeding independently of parenteral nutrition.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effect of early trophic feeding versus enteral fasting on feed tolerance, growth and development, and the incidence of neonatal morbidity (including necrotising enterocolitis and invasive infection) and mortality in very preterm or VLBW infants.

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) (The Cochrane Library 2012, Issue 12), MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL (1980 until December 2012), conference proceedings and previous reviews.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials that assessed the effects of early trophic feeding (milk volumes up to 24 ml/kg/day introduced before 96 hours postnatal age and continued until at least one week after birth) versus a comparable period of enteral fasting in very preterm or very low birth weight infants.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We extracted data using the standard methods of the Cochrane Neonatal Review Group with separate evaluation of trial quality and data extraction by two authors and synthesis of data using risk ratio, risk difference and mean difference.

MAIN RESULTS

Nine trials in which a total of 754 very preterm or very low birth weight infants participated were eligible for inclusion. Few participants were extremely preterm (< 28 weeks) or extremely low birth weight (< 1000 grams) or growth restricted. These trials did not provide any evidence that early trophic feeding affected feed tolerance or growth rates. Meta-analysis did not detect a statistically significant effect on the incidence of necrotising enterocolitis: typical risk ratio 1.07 (95% confidence interval 0.67 to 1.70); risk difference 0.01 (-0.03 to 0.05).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The available trial data do not provide evidence of important beneficial or harmful effects of early trophic feeding for very preterm or very low birth weight infants. The applicability of these findings to extremely preterm, extremely low birth weight or growth restricted infants is limited. Further randomised controlled trials would be needed to determine how trophic feeding compared with enteral fasting affects important outcomes in this population.

A decrease in the number of cases of necrotizing enterocolitis associated with the enhancement of infection prevention and control measures during a Staphylococcus aureus outbreak in a neonatal intensive care unit

OBJECTIVE

Most cases of necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC) are sporadic, but outbreaks in hospital settings suggest an infectious cause. Our neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) experienced an outbreak of methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA). We aimed to assess whether the enhancement of infection prevention and control measures would be associated with a reduction in the number of cases of NEC.

DESIGN

Retrospective chart review.

SETTING

A 24-bed, university-affiliated, inborn level 3 NICU.

PARTICIPANTS

Infants of less than 30 weeks gestation or birth weight ≤ 1,500 g admitted to the NICU between January 2007 and December 2008 were considered at risk of NEC. All cases of NEC were reviewed.

INTERVENTIONS

Infection prevention and control measures, including hand hygiene education, were enhanced during the outbreak. Avoidance of overcapacity in the NICU was reinforced, environmental services (ES) measures were enhanced, and ES hours were increased.

RESULTS

Two hundred eighty-two at-risk infants were admitted during the study. Their gestational age and birth weight (mean ± SD) were 28.2 ± 2.7 weeks and 1,031 ± 290 g, respectively. The proportion of NEC was 18/110 (16.4%) before the outbreak, 1/54 (1.8%) during the outbreak, and 4/118 (3.4%) after the outbreak. After adjustment for gestational age, birth weight, gender, and singleton versus multiple births, the proportion was lower in the postoutbreak period than in the preoutbreak period (P < .002).

CONCLUSION

Although this observational study cannot establish a causal relationship, there was a significant decrease in the incidence of NEC following implementation of enhanced infection prevention and control measures to manage an MSSA outbreak.

The impact of feeding interval on feeding outcomes in very low birth-weight infants

OBJECTIVE

Test the hypothesis that very low birth-weight (VLBW) infants fed every 2 h (q2) are able to reach full enteral feedings more quickly than infants fed every 3 h (q3).

STUDY DESIGN

We performed a retrospective cohort study comparing q2 infants (n=103) with q3 infants (n=251). The primary outcome was days from start of a feeding advance to full feedings (120 ml per kg per day). Multivariable regression models were used to control for maternal and perinatal factors that preceded the initiation of the feeding advance.

RESULT

Infants fed q2 reached full feedings 2.7 days sooner than q3 infants (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.5, 3.9). After adjustment for confounders, q2 infants reached full feedings 3.7 (95% CI 1.6, 5.9) days more quickly. Infants fed q3 were more likely to receive >28 days of parenteral nutrition (odds ratio (OR) 4.7; 95% CI 1.5, 14.4), and were more likely to have feeds held for ≥ 7 days (OR 4.7, 95% CI 1.9, 11.7).

CONCLUSION

VLBW infants demonstrate improved feeding tolerance when fed more frequently.

Delayed introduction of progressive enteral feeds to prevent necrotising enterocolitis in very low birth weight infants

BACKGROUND

The introduction of progressive enteral feeds for very low birth weight (VLBW) infants is often delayed for several days or longer after birth due to concern that earlier introduction may not be tolerated and may increase the risk of necrotising enterocolitis (NEC). However, delaying enteral feeding could diminish the functional adaptation of the gastrointestinal tract and prolong the need for parenteral nutrition with its attendant infectious and metabolic risks.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effect of delayed introduction of progressive enteral feeds on the incidence of NEC, mortality and other morbidities in VLBW infants.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, The Cochrane Library, 2010, Issue 4), MEDLINE (1966 to December 2010), EMBASE (1980 to December 2010), CINAHL (1982 to December 2010), conference proceedings, and previous reviews.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials that assessed the effect of delayed (more than four days' postnatal age) versus earlier introduction of progressive enteral feeds on the incidence of NEC, mortality and other morbidities in VLBW infants.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data collection and analysis were performed in accordance with the standard methods of the Cochrane Neonatal Review Group.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified five randomised controlled trials (RCT) in which a total of 600 infants participated. The trials defined delayed introduction as later than five to seven days after birth and early introduction as less than four days after birth. Two of the trials, in which a total of 488 infants participated, only recruited growth-restricted infants with Doppler ultrasound evidence of abnormal fetal circulatory distribution or flow. Meta-analyses did not detect statistically significant effects on the risk of NEC [typical relative risk 0.89, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.58 to 1.37] or all cause mortality (typical relative risk 0.93, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.64). Infants who had delayed introduction of enteral feeds took significantly longer to establish full enteral feeding (reported median difference three days).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Current trial data do not provide evidence that delayed introduction of progressive enteral feeds reduces the risk of NEC in VLBW infants. Delaying the introducing of progressive enteral feeds results in several days delay in establishing full enteral feeds but the clinical importance of this effect is unclear. Further RCTs are needed to give more precise estimates of the effect of delaying the introduction of enteral feeds on clinical outcomes in VLBW infants.

Early trophic feeding for very low birth weight infants

BACKGROUND

The introduction of enteral feeds for very low birth weight (VLBW) infants is often delayed due to concern that early introduction may not be tolerated and may increase the risk of necrotising enterocolitis. However, enteral fasting may diminish the functional adaptation of the immature gastrointestinal tract and prolong the need for parenteral nutrition with its attendant infectious and metabolic risks. Early trophic feeding, giving infants very small volumes of milk during the first week after birth, may promote intestinal maturation, enhance feeding tolerance and decrease time to reach full enteral feeding independently of parenteral nutrition.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effect of early trophic feeding versus enteral fasting on feed tolerance, growth, and the incidence of necrotising enterocolitis, mortality and other morbidities in VLBW infants.

SEARCH STRATEGY

The standard search strategy of the Cochrane Neonatal Group was used. Searches were made of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, The Cochrane Library, Issue 1, 2009), MEDLINE (1966 - February 2009), EMBASE (1980 - February 2009), CINAHL (1982 - February 2009), conference proceedings, and previous reviews.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials that assessed the effects of early trophic feeding (milk volumes up to 24 ml/kg/day introduced before 96 hours postnatal age and continued until at least one week after birth) versus a comparable period of enteral fasting in VLBW infants.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

The standard methods of the Cochrane Neonatal Group were used, with separate evaluation of trial quality and data extraction by two review authors. Data were synthesised using a fixed effects model and reported using typical relative risk, typical risk difference and weighted mean difference.

MAIN RESULTS

Nine trials, in which a total of 754 VLBW infants participated, were eligible for inclusion. These trials did not provide any evidence that early trophic feeding affected feed tolerance or growth rates in VLBW infants. Meta-analysis did not detect a statistically significant effect on the incidence of necrotising enterocolitis: typical relative risk 1.07 (95% confidence interval 0.67, 1.70); typical risk difference 0.01 (95% confidence interval -0.04, 0.05).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The available data cannot exclude important beneficial or harmful effects and are insufficient to inform clinical practice. Further large pragmatic randomised controlled trials are needed to determine how early trophic feeding compared with enteral fasting affects important clinical outcomes in VLBW infants.

Earlier initiation of enteral nutrition is associated with lower risk of late-onset bacteremia only in most mature very low birth weight infants

OBJECTIVE

To examine the temporal relationship between early enteral nutrition (EN) and coagulase-negative staphylococcal (CoNS)-related late-onset bacteremia (LOB) in very low birth weight (VLBW) neonates.

STUDY DESIGN

Multivariate analyses performed on a large retrospective cohort of neonates admitted to a tertiary care neonatal unit.

RESULTS

Due to the predominance and particular timing of CoNS, LOB occurred mostly during a critical period peaking at 9 days of age. This period also corresponded to a gestational maturation-dependent breakpoint in time to achieve full EN, associated with significant reduction in incidence of bacteremia (adjusted OR 0.15; 95%CI [0.10-0.20]; P<0.05). In subgroup analyses, more 'mature' (i.e. >or=28 and <32 weeks) preterm neonates reached full EN before this critical period and consequently, earlier EN in this group was associated with a shorter duration of PN and reduced incidence of CoNS bacteremia. In contrast, most 'immature' preterm neonates (i.e. <28 weeks) generally received PN beyond this critical period and therefore, did not appear to benefit from earlier initiation of EN. Even though EN was usually initiated earlier when formula milk was used as a complement to breast-milk, this practice was not associated with a reduction in the incidence of CoNS in any preterm gestational groups tested.

CONCLUSION

A reduction in incidence of bacteremia was observed only in more mature VLBW neonates who achieved full EN before the second-week of life critical period for CoNS, These results provide important endpoints for future trials evaluating changes in nutritional interventions potentially effective in reducing neonatal LOB.

Neonatal outcome of gastroschisis is mainly influenced by nutritional management

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study was to evaluate early minimal enteral feeding (MEF) and gradual enteral nutrition increment on neonatal outcome of gastroschisis.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

An intervention group was prospectively assessed and compared with an observational historical control group. The prospective study relied on a new protocol of enteral nutrition. According to the new protocol, MEF was initiated 5 days after bowel reintegration and milk amounts were increased 12 mL/kg/day. In the control group, enteral nutrition was delayed until resolution of postoperative ileus, and increment of feeding was not systematized.

RESULTS

Twenty-two patients were included in the MEF group and compared with 51 control patients. Infants in the control group had lower gestational age (36 vs 35 gestational weeks [GW], P=0.03) and birth weight (2465 vs 2200 g, P=0.05). Time to first enteral nutrition (5 vs 11.5 days, P=0.0005) was significantly shorter in the MEF group. All patients in this group were fully enteral fed at day 60, though 30.4% of patients in the control group still needed parenteral nutrition at day 60 (P=0.004). Incidence of nosocomial infection was reduced (9% of patients vs 40%, P=0.016) and hospital stay tended to be shorter in the MEF group (40 vs 54.5 days, P=0.08). In the univariate analysis, factors influencing the length of parenteral nutrition during the 2 periods were the severity of perivisceritis and new nutritional protocol. In the multivariate analysis, only nutritional protocol was significantly associated with the length of parenteral nutrition (P=0.038).

CONCLUSIONS

Early MEF and controlled increase of nutritional elements after bowel reintegration significantly improved outcome of gastroschisis in newborns.

Does the enteral feeding advancement affect short-term outcomes in very low birth weight infants?

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Controversy exists regarding the optimal enteral feeding regimen of very low birth weight infants (VLBW). Rapid advancement of enteral feeding has been associated with an increased rate of necrotizing enterocolitis. In contrast, delaying enteral feeding may have unfavorable effects on nutrition, growth, and neurodevelopment. The aim is to compare the short-term outcomes of VLBW infants in tertiary care centers according to their enteral feeding advancement.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We prospectively studied the influence of center-specific enteral feeding advancement in 1430 VLBW infants recruited from 13 tertiary neonatal intensive care units in Germany on short-term outcome parameters. The centers were post hoc stratified to "rapid advancement to full enteral feeds" (median duration of advancement to full enteral feeds < or =12.5 days; 6 centers), that is, rapid advancement (RA), or "slow advancement to full enteral feeds" (median duration of advancement to full enteral feeds >12.5 days; 7 centers), that is, slow advancement (SA).

RESULTS

VLBW infants born in centers with SA (n = 713) had a significantly higher rate of sepsis compared with VLBW infants born in centers with RA (n = 717), which was particularly evident for late-onset sepsis (14.0% vs 20.4%; P = 0.002). Furthermore, more central venous lines (48.6% vs 31.1%, P < 0.001) and antibiotics (92.4% vs 77.7%, P < 0.001) were used in centers with SA.

CONCLUSIONS

Center differences in enteral feeding advancement occur and may have a significant impact on short-term outcomes such as nosocomial sepsis. Large, multicenter, prospective trials are required to further elucidate the optimal feeding strategy for VLBW infants.

Neonatal nutrition: a brief review

BACKGROUND

With increasing survival of extremely premature infants, emphasis is now focused on the quality of these survivors' lives. Possibly the most important factor in the premature's ability to survive in the NICU and thrive is the ability to replicate in utero growth through enteral and parenteral nutrition.

DATA SOURCES

Current literature and review articles were retrieved from PubMed and personal files of the authors.

RESULTS

The use and complications of the various components of total parenteral nutrition (TPN) were reviewed. The composition of appropriate enteral feeds for the premature was reviewed as was the difficulties associated with the establishment of adequate enteral feeds in the premature infants.

CONCLUSIONS

Early initiation of amino acids in TPN and timely increases in the components of TPN can improve the caloric intake of prematures. Enteral feeds, particularly of breast milk, may be started within the first few days of life in all but hemodynamically unstable prematures. Newer lipid preparations show promise in reversing the hepatic damage of TPN associated cholestatic jaundice.

Delayed introduction of progressive enteral feeds to prevent necrotising enterocolitis in very low birth weight infants

BACKGROUND

The introduction of progressive enteral feeds for very low birth weight infants is often delayed for several days or longer after birth due to concern that earlier introduction may not be tolerated and may increase the risk of necrotising enterocolitis. However, delaying enteral feeding could diminish the functional adaptation of the gastrointestinal tract and prolong the need for parenteral nutrition with its attendant infectious and metabolic risks.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effect of delayed introduction of progressive enteral feeds on the incidence of necrotising enterocolitis, mortality and other morbidities in very low birth weight infants.

SEARCH STRATEGY

The standard search strategy of the Cochrane Neonatal Group was used. Searches were made of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, The Cochrane Library, Issue 4, 2007), MEDLINE (1966 - December 2007), EMBASE (1980 - December 2007), CINAHL (1982- December 2007), conference proceedings, and previous reviews.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials that assessed the effect of delayed (after 96 hours' postnatal age) versus earlier introduction of progressive enteral feeds on the incidence of necrotising enterocolitis, mortality and other morbidities in very low birth weight infants.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

The standard methods of the Cochrane Neonatal Group were used, with separate evaluation of trial quality and data extraction by two authors. Data were synthesised using a fixed effects model and reported using typical relative risk, typical risk difference and weighted mean difference.

MAIN RESULTS

Two small trials in which a total of 74 infants participated were eligible for inclusion. Only a minority of participants were of extremely low birth weight or extreme preterm gestation. These trials provided no evidence that delayed introduction of progressive enteral feeds affected the incidence of necrotising enterocolitis, mortality or other neonatal morbidities. However, in view of the small number of participants, important beneficial or harmful effects cannot be excluded.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The available data are insufficient to inform clinical practice. Further large pragmatic randomised controlled trials are needed to determine how the timing of the introduction of progressive enteral feeds affects important clinical outcomes in very low birth weight infants, and particularly in extremely low birth weight or growth restricted infants.

Does early enteral feeding of very low birth weight infants increase the risk of necrotizing enterocolitis?

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE

In this retrospective study, we intended to test whether early enteral feeding (EEF) of very low birth weight (VLBW) preterm babies increases the risk of necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC) or not.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

Overall, 297 VLBW preterm babies admitted to the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) between April 2003 and April 2006 were included. The study consisted of two periods: the first period was between April 2003 and October 2004, when babies were not fed enterally until they were extubated (167 preterm VLBWs). The second period was between November 2004 and April 2006, when babies were fed even when they were intubated, starting preferably on the first day of life (130 preterm VLBWs). Criteria for withholding enteral feeding in both periods were hypotension necessitating vasopressor agent use, abdominal distention, abdominal tenderness and suspected or proven NEC. Possible risk factors for NEC were also recorded.

RESULTS

The overall incidence of NEC in VLBW preterm babies was 6.7% and did not differ between the two study periods: 7.2% in the late and 6.2% in the EEF regimens. On logistic regression analysis, the most important risk factors associated with NEC were sepsis (P<0.001) and blood culture positivity (P<0.001). The average daily weight gain was significantly higher in the early fed babies (P=0.011).

CONCLUSIONS

The EEF of VLBW preterm babies does not increase the risk of NEC. Increased daily weight gain is an important reason to feed these babies earlier.