Dataset Information

Clinical Impact of Supplementation with Pasteurized Donor Human Milk by High-Temperature Short-Time Method versus Holder Method in Extremely Low Birth Weight Infants: A Multicentre Randomized Controlled Trial.

ABSTRACT: Nosocomial infections are a frequent and serious problem in extremely low birth weight (ELBW) infants. Donor human milk (DHM) is the best alternative for feeding these babies when mother's own milk (MOM) is not available. Recently, a patented prototype of a High-Temperature Short-Time (HTST) pasteurizer adapted to a human milk bank setting showed a lesser impact on immunologic components. We designed a multicentre randomized controlled trial that investigates whether, in ELBW infants with an insufficient MOM supply, the administration of HTST pasteurized DHM reduces the incidence of confirmed catheter-associated sepsis compared to DHM pasteurized with the Holder method. From birth until 34 weeks postmenstrual age, patients included in the study received DHM, as a supplement, pasteurized by the Holder or HTST method. A total of 213 patients were randomized; 79 (HTST group) and 81 (Holder group) were included in the analysis. We found no difference in the frequency of nosocomial sepsis between the patients of the two methods-41.8% (33/79) of HTST group patients versus 45.7% (37/81) of Holder group patients, relative risk 0.91 (0.64-1.3), p = 0.62. In conclusion, when MOM is not available, supplementing during admission with DHM pasteurized by the HTST versus Holder method might not have an impact on the incidence of catheter-associated sepsis.

SUBMITTER: Garcia-Lara NR

PROVIDER: S-EPMC11013736 | biostudies-literature | 2024 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Clinical Impact of Supplementation with Pasteurized Donor Human Milk by High-Temperature Short-Time Method versus Holder Method in Extremely Low Birth Weight Infants: A Multicentre Randomized Controlled Trial.

García-Lara Nadia Raquel NR Escuder-Vieco Diana D Cabrera-Lafuente Marta M Keller Kristin K De Diego-Poncela Cristina C Jiménez-González Concepción C Núñez-Ramos Raquel R Flores-Antón Beatriz B Escribano-Palomino Esperanza E Alonso-Díaz Clara C Vázquez-Román Sara S Ureta-Velasco Noelia N Cruz-Bértolo Javier De La J Pallás-Alonso Carmen Rosa CR

Nutrients 20240408 7

Nosocomial infections are a frequent and serious problem in extremely low birth weight (ELBW) infants. Donor human milk (DHM) is the best alternative for feeding these babies when mother's own milk (MOM) is not available. Recently, a patented prototype of a High-Temperature Short-Time (HTST) pasteurizer adapted to a human milk bank setting showed a lesser impact on immunologic components. We designed a multicentre randomized controlled trial that investigates whether, in ELBW infants with an ins ...[more]

PMID: 38613123

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundWhen sufficient maternal breast milk is not available, alternative forms of enteral nutrition for preterm or low birth weight (LBW) infants are donor breast milk or artificial formula. Donor breast milk may retain some of the non-nutritive benefits of maternal breast milk for preterm or LBW infants. However, feeding with artificial formula may ensure more consistent delivery of greater amounts of nutrients. Uncertainty exists about the balance of risks and benefits of feeding formula versus donor breast milk for preterm or LBW infants.ObjectivesTo determine the effect of feeding with formula compared with donor breast milk on growth and development in preterm or low birth weight (LBW) infants.Search methodsWe used the Cochrane Neonatal search strategy, including electronic searches of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2019, Issue 5), Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (3 May 2019), as well as conference proceedings, previous reviews, and clinical trials.Selection criteriaRandomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing feeding with formula versus donor breast milk in preterm or LBW infants.Data collection and analysisTwo review authors assessed trial eligibility and risk of bias and extracted data independently. We analysed treatment effects as described in the individual trials and reported risk ratios (RRs) and risk differences (RDs) for dichotomous data, and mean differences (MDs) for continuous data, with respective 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We used a fixed-effect model in meta-analyses and explored potential causes of heterogeneity in subgroup analyses. We assessed the certainty of evidence for the main comparison at the outcome level using GRADE methods.Main resultsTwelve trials with a total of 1879 infants fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Four trials compared standard term formula versus donor breast milk and eight compared nutrient-enriched preterm formula versus donor breast milk. Only the five most recent trials used nutrient-fortified donor breast milk. The trials contain various weaknesses in methodological quality, specifically concerns about allocation concealment in four trials and lack of blinding in most of the trials. Most of the included trials were funded by companies that made the study formula.Formula-fed infants had higher in-hospital rates of weight gain (mean difference (MD) 2.51, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.93 to 3.08 g/kg/day), linear growth (MD 1.21, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.65 mm/week) and head growth (MD 0.85, 95% CI 0.47 to 1.23 mm/week). These meta-analyses contained high levels of heterogeneity. We did not find evidence of an effect on long-term growth or neurodevelopment. Formula feeding increased the risk of necrotising enterocolitis (typical risk ratio (RR) 1.87, 95% CI 1.23 to 2.85; risk difference (RD) 0.03, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.05; number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) 33, 95% CI 20 to 100; 9 studies, 1675 infants).The GRADE certainty of evidence was moderate for rates of weight gain, linear growth, and head growth (downgraded for high levels of heterogeneity) and was moderate for neurodevelopmental disability, all-cause mortality, and necrotising enterocolitis (downgraded for imprecision).Authors' conclusionsIn preterm and LBW infants, moderate-certainty evidence indicates that feeding with formula compared with donor breast milk, either as a supplement to maternal expressed breast milk or as a sole diet, results in higher rates of weight gain, linear growth, and head growth and a higher risk of developing necrotising enterocolitis. The trial data do not show an effect on all-cause mortality, or on long-term growth or neurodevelopment.

Project description:BackgroundWhen sufficient maternal breast milk is not available, alternative forms of enteral nutrition for preterm or low birth weight (LBW) infants are donor breast milk or artificial formula. Donor breast milk may retain some of the non-nutritive benefits of maternal breast milk for preterm or LBW infants. However, feeding with artificial formula may ensure more consistent delivery of greater amounts of nutrients. Uncertainty exists about the balance of risks and benefits of feeding formula versus donor breast milk for preterm or LBW infants.ObjectivesTo determine the effect of feeding with formula compared with donor breast milk on growth and development in preterm or low birth weight (LBW) infants.Search methodsWe used the Cochrane Neonatal search strategy, including electronic searches of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2017, Issue 6), Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (until 8 June 2017), as well as conference proceedings and previous reviews.Selection criteriaRandomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing feeding with formula versus donor breast milk in preterm or LBW infants.Data collection and analysisTwo review authors assessed trial eligibility and risk of bias and extracted data independently. We analysed treatment effects as described in the individual trials and reported risk ratios (RRs) and risk differences (RDs) for dichotomous data, and mean differences (MDs) for continuous data, with respective 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We used a fixed-effect model in meta-analyses and explored potential causes of heterogeneity in subgroup analyses. We assessed the quality of evidence for the main comparison at the outcome level using "Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation" (GRADE) methods.Main resultsEleven trials, in which 1809 infants participated in total, fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Four trials compared standard term formula versus donor breast milk and seven compared nutrient-enriched preterm formula versus donor breast milk. Only the four most recent trials used nutrient-fortified donor breast milk. The trials contain various weaknesses in methodological quality, specifically concerns about allocation concealment in four trials and lack of blinding in most of the trials.Formula-fed infants had higher in-hospital rates of weight gain (mean difference (MD) 2.51, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.93 to 3.08 g/kg/day), linear growth (MD 1.21, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.65 mm/week) and head growth (MD 0.85, 95% CI 0.47 to 1.23 mm/week). We did not find evidence of an effect on long-term growth or neurodevelopment. Formula feeding increased the risk of necrotising enterocolitis (typical risk ratio (RR) 1.87, 95% CI 1.23 to 2.85; risk difference (RD) 0.03, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.06).The GRADE quality of evidence was moderate for rates of weight gain, linear growth, and head growth (downgraded for high levels of heterogeneity) and was moderate for neurodevelopmental disability, all-cause mortality, and necrotising enterocolitis (downgraded for imprecision).Authors' conclusionsIn preterm and LBW infants, feeding with formula compared with donor breast milk, either as a supplement to maternal expressed breast milk or as a sole diet, results in higher rates of weight gain, linear growth, and head growth and a higher risk of developing necrotising enterocolitis. The trial data do not show an effect on all-cause mortality, or on long-term growth or neurodevelopment.

Dataset Information

Clinical Impact of Supplementation with Pasteurized Donor Human Milk by High-Temperature Short-Time Method versus Holder Method in Extremely Low Birth Weight Infants: A Multicentre Randomized Controlled Trial.

Publications

Clinical Impact of Supplementation with Pasteurized Donor Human Milk by High-Temperature Short-Time Method versus Holder Method in Extremely Low Birth Weight Infants: A Multicentre Randomized Controlled Trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets