Enteral feeding in neonates ≥34 weeks of gestation with moderate to severe birth asphyxia: A retrospective observational study

There are no standard guidelines regarding time for initiation of feeds in moderate to severely asphyxiated neonates and data regarding the same in neonates are scanty. Case sheets of all neonates born ≥34 weeks of gestation who satisfied the definition were analysed. The early feeding group was defined as those in whomh feeds were started <24 h and the late feeding group as those started ≥24 h of life. The primary outcome of the study was time to achieve full enteral feeds. A total of 184 neonates were enrolled. Mean time to reach full enteral feeding was 53.7 ± 24.8 h in the early feeding group as compared to 95.0 ± 81.1 h in late enteral feeding group, with a mean difference of 41.3 (25.7-56.8) h. The incidence of adverse secondary outcomes was higher in the late feeding group.

Impact of Type of Enteral Feeds on Early Postoperative Outcomes After Congenital Heart Surgery in Neonates and Young Infants: A Single Center Experience in a Limited Resource Environment

Background: Breast milk is known to prevent infections and is recommended for enteral feeding of infants after congenital heart surgery (CHS). During the Covid-19 pandemic, expressed breast milk (EBM) was not always available; hence, feeding after CHS was maintained with EBM or infant formula (IF) or both; we evaluated the impact of enteral feed type on early postoperative outcomes after CHS. Methods: In a prospective observational study, consecutive neonates and infants <4 months undergoing CHS were divided into EBM, IF, or EBM+IF groups; incidences of postoperative infections, ventilation duration, intensive care unit (ICU) stay, and mortality were studied. Results: Among 270 patients; 90 (33.3%) received EBM, 89 (32.9%) received IF, and 91 (33.7%) received EBM+IF. IF group had more neonates (78.7%[IF] vs 42.2%[EBM] and 52.7%[EBM+IF], P < 0.001) and greater surgical complexity. Postoperative infections were 9 (10.0%) in EBM; 23 (25.8%) in IF; and 14 (15.4%) in EBM+IF (P = .016). IF group (OR 2.58 [1.05-6.38], P = .040), absence of preoperative feeding (OR 6.97 [1.06-45.97], P = .040), and increase in cardiopulmonary bypass time (OR 1.005 [1.001-1.010], P = .027) were associated with postoperative infection. Ventilation duration in hours was 26 (18-47.5) in EBM; 47 (28-54.5) in IF; and 40 (17.5-67) in EBM+IF (P = .004). ICU stay in days was 4 (3-7) in EBM; 6 (5-9) in IF; and 5 (3-9) in EBM+IF (P = .001). Mortality did not differ (P = .556). Conclusion: IF group had a greater proportion of neonates with higher surgical complexity. Patients who received EBM after CHS had fewer postoperative infections and better postoperative outcomes compared to those receiving IF or EBM+IF.

Nasal continuous positive airway pressure practices in preterm infants: A survey of neonatal providers

BACKGROUND

The standard of care for respiratory support of preterm infants is nasal continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP), yet practices are not standardized. Our aim was to survey CPAP practices in infants < 32 weeks gestation among the American Academy of Pediatrics Neonatal-Perinatal section.

METHODS

A US, web-based survey inquired about the initiation, management, and discontinuation of CPAP, and chinstrap use and oral feedings on CPAP.

RESULTS

857 providers consented. Regarding criteria to discontinue/wean CPAP: 69% use specific respiratory stability criteria; 22% a specific post-menstrual age; 8% responded other. 64% did not have guidelines for CPAP discontinuation; 54% did not have guidelines for CPAP initiation. 66% believe chinstraps improve CPAP efficacy; however, 11% routinely apply a chinstrap. 22% allow oral feeds on CPAP in certain circumstances.

CONCLUSION

There are meaningful variabilities in CPAP practices among neonatal providers across the US. Given the potential long-term implications this can have on the growth and development of the preterm lung, further evidence-based research is needed in relation to respiratory outcomes to optimize and standardize CPAP strategies.

Omitting Routine Gastric Residual Checks May Help To Accelerate Enteral Feeds And Postnatal Growth In Stable Preterm Infants

BACGROUND

The gastric residual check is routine procedure in neonatal intensive care units while increasing the amounts of feeds given via oro/nasogastric tubes as a precaution for necrotising entereocolitis and intestinal intolerance. However this time consuming procedure is mostly misleading and there is recently a tendency not to check prefeed residuals.

METHODS

We have changed our clinical protocol at the end of 2018 to increase the feeds without checking the residuals and investigated its effects on the incidence of intestinal intolerance, time to reach full feeds and growth parameters.

RESULTS

Comparing the results of 60 preterm infants < 35 weeks cared in previous years (2016-2017), 77 preterms cared in 2019 without routine residual checks have reached total feeds 6 days earlier (9,32 (±8,52), 15,32 (±12,98), p< 0.01) discharged 1 day earlier (41,72 (±28,73), 43,90 (±35,13), p = 091) and had higher weight (2832,17 (±520,40), 2534,15 (±451,84), p<0.01) and head circumference gain (33,82 (±1,51, 32,58 (±1,84), p<0.01). Extrauterine growth restriction rate (<10 percentile) for head circumference was significantly lower and for weight and height also insignificantly decreased.

CONCLUSION

We conclude that omitting routine gastric residual check in a clinically stable preterm infant may help to accelerate enteral feeds and growth parameters. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

A laboratory-based evaluation of tube blocking and microbial risks associated with one blended enteral feed recipe

BACKGROUND

Concerns associated with blended enteral feeds include the risk of blocked tubes and microbial contamination, although the available evidence is limited. The present laboratory-based investigation aimed to examine these risks in a blended feed providing a nutritionally adequate intake for a hypothetical patient.

METHODS

A one-blended feed recipe was made using three different methods (professional, jug and stick blenders) and three storage procedures. Feed samples were syringed via 10-, 12- and 14-French (Fr) enteral feeding tubes and both blockages and the time taken were recorded. Feed samples were diluted, plated on agars, incubated and bacterial colony-forming units (CFU) counted. After storage at -80 °C, identification was undertaken using 16S rRNA polymerase chain reaction sequencing.

RESULTS

Two blockages occurred during 27 administrations of feed made using a professional blender, although they were resolved with a water flush. No blockages occurred with the 14-Fr tube and administration was quicker with wider tubes (P < 0.00001). There was no significant difference between the total bacterial CFU of feeds prepared using different methods (P = 0.771) or stored differently. The genus of bacteria identified included Enterococcus, Bacillus, lactose-fermenting Enterobacteriaceae, Pseudomonas and Staphylococcus. Pathogens, such as Clostridium spp., Salmonella spp. and Vibrio spp., were not identified by phenotypic tests used. Sequencing identified Escherichia coli, Shigella spp., Streptococcus lutetiensis and Staphylococcus epidermidis.

CONCLUSIONS

The present study found no risk of tube blockages when one blended feed recipe made using three methods was delivered via a 14-Fr tube. There is concern about bacterial contamination, although this was not influenced by the methods of preparation or storage used in the present study.

Benefits of probiotics on enteral nutrition in preterm neonates: a systematic review

INTRODUCTION

The optimization of enteral nutrition is a priority in preterm neonates worldwide. Probiotics are known to improve gut maturity and function in preterm neonates. To our knowledge, previous systematic reviews have not adequately assessed the effects of probiotic supplementation on enteral nutrition in preterm neonates.

OBJECTIVE

We assessed the evidence on effects of probiotics on enteral nutrition in preterm neonates.

DESIGN

A systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of probiotic supplementation in preterm (gestation <37 wk) or low-birth-weight (birth weight <2500 g) neonates was conducted. With the use of the Cochrane Neonatal Review Group strategy, we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PubMed, EMBASE, and Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature databases and proceedings of Pediatric Academic Society meetings in April 2014.

RESULTS

A total of 25 RCTs (n = 5895) were included in the review. A meta-analysis (random-effects model) of data from 19 of 25 trials (n = 4527) estimated that the time to full enteral feeds was shorter in the probiotic group (mean difference: -1.54 d; 95% CI: -2.75, -0.32 d; P < 0.00001, I(2) = 93%). Other benefits included fewer episodes of feed intolerance, better weight gain and growth velocity, decreased transition time from orogastric to breast feeds, and increased postprandial mesenteric flow. There were no adverse effects of probiotic supplementation.

CONCLUSIONS

Probiotics reduced the time to full enteral feeds in preterm neonates. Additional research is necessary to assess the optimal dose, duration, and probiotic strain or strains used specifically for facilitating enteral nutrition in this population.