Objective

Small for gestational age (SGA) preterm infants (PT) are at greatest risk for growth failure. Our objective was to assess the impact of an exclusive human milk diet (HUM) on growth velocities and neonatal morbidities from birth to discharge in a SGA population.

Study design

Multicenter, retrospective cohort study, subgroup analysis of SGA PT comparing a cow’s milk diet (CMD) with HUM diet.

Results

At birth 420 PT were classified as SGA (197 CMD group, 223 HUM group). Demographics and anthropometric measurements were similar. HUM group PT showed improvement in length Z score at discharge (p = 0.024) and reduction in necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC) (p = 0.004).

Conclusion

SGA PT fed a HUM diet had significantly decreased incidence of NEC, surgical NEC, and late-onset sepsis. Due to concerns about growth in a HUM diet, it is reassuring SGA infants fed the HUM diet had similar growth to CMD diet with trends toward improvement

Objective

An increasingly common practice is to feed preterm infants a base diet comprising only human milk (HM), usually fortified with a cow's milk (CM)-derived fortifier (CMDF). We evaluated the safety of CMDF in a diet of 100% mother's own milk (MOM) against a HM-derived fortifier (HMDF). To date, this has received little research attention.

Study Design

We reanalyzed a 12-center randomized trial, originally comparing exclusive HM feeding, including MOM, donor milk (DM), and HMDF, versus a CM exposed group fed MOM, preterm formula (PTF), and CMDF1. However, for the current study, we performed a subgroup analysis (n = 114) selecting only infants receiving 100% MOM base diet plus fortification, and fed no DM or PTF. This allowed for an isolated comparison of fortifier type: CMDF versus HMDF to evaluate the primary outcomes: necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC) and a severe morbidity index of NEC surgery or death; and several secondary outcomes.

Results

CMDF and HMDF groups had similar baseline characteristics. CMDF was associated with higher risk of NEC; relative risk (RR) 4.2 (p = 0.038), NEC surgery or death (RR 5.1, p = 0.014); and reduced head circumference gain (p = 0.04).

Conclusions

In neonates fed, as currently recommended with a MOM-based diet, the safety of CMDF when compared to HMDF has been little researched. We conclude that available evidence points to an increase in adverse outcomes with CMDF, including NEC and severe morbidity comprising NEC surgery or death.

Objective

Substantial losses of nutrients may occur during tube (gavage) feeding of fortified human milk. Our objective was to compare the losses of key macronutrients and minerals based on method of fortification and gavage feeding method.

Methods

We used clinically available gavage feeding systems and measured pre- and post-feeding (end-point) nutrient content of calcium (Ca), phosphorus (Phos), protein, and fat. Comparisons were made between continuous, gravity bolus, and 30-minute infusion pump feeding systems, as well as human milk fortified with donor human milk-based and bovine milk-based human milk fortifier using an in vitro model.

Results

Feeding method was significantly associated with fat and Ca losses, with increased losses in continuous feeds. Fat losses in continuous feeds were substantial, with 40 ± 3 % of initial fat lost during the feeding process. After correction for feeding method, human milk fortified with donor milk-based fortifier was associated with significantly less loss of Ca (8 ± 4% vs. 28 ± 4%, p< 0.001), Phos (3 ± 4% vs. 24 ± 4%, p < 0.001), and fat (17 ± 2% vs. 25 ± 2%, p = 0.001) than human milk fortified with a bovine milk-based fortifier (Mean ± SEM).

Background: Implementation of exclusive human milk (EHM) feeding defined as mother's own milk or donor human milk fortified with human milk-derived fortifiers can place an economic burden on institutions.

Methods: Retrospective study of very low birth weight (VLBW) infants before and after the implementation of EHM feedings. Neonatal demographics and clinical outcomes including necrotizing enterocolitis, severe retinopathy of prematurity, bronchopulmonary dysplasia, late-onset sepsis, days on parenteral nutrition (PN), and length-of-stay were collected. The net cost to the institution was estimated using published data.

Results: Sixty-four infants in the pre-EHM period and 57 infants in the post-EHM period were enrolled. Net product acquisition cost in 2020 and 2021 was $884,823. The EHM feeding guideline led to a reduction in the mean length of stay and mean days of PN use by 6.3 and 6.8 days per infant, respectively. This led to a cost saving of $1,813,444 ($31,815 per infant). No significant difference in incidence of short-term morbidities was observed. Combining the cost avoidance from clinical outcomes, the estimated financial impact over 2 years excluding insurance reimbursement was an estimated $ 913,840 ($16,032 per infant).

Conclusion: Implementation of EHM-based feeding in VLBW infants is a cost-effective option for neonatal intensive care units that can result in reduced length of stay and days on PN without adversely impacting short-term morbidities.

Background

Human milk–based human milk fortifier (HMB-HMF) makes it possible to provide an exclusive human milk diet (EHMD) to very low birth weight (VLBW) infants in neonatal intensive care units (NICUs). Before the introduction of HMB-HMF in 2006, NICUs relied on bovine milk–based human milk fortifiers (BMB-HMFs) when mother's own milk (MOM) or pasteurized donor human milk (PDHM) could not provide adequate nutrition. Despite evidence supporting the clinical benefits of an EHMD (such as reducing the frequency of morbidities), barriers prevent its widespread adoption, including limited health economics and outcomes data, cost concerns, and lack of standardized feeding guidelines.

Methods

Nine experts from seven institutions gathered for a virtual roundtable discussion in October 2020 to discuss the benefits and challenges to implementing an EHMD program in the NICU environment. Each center provided a review of the process of starting their program and also presented data on various neonatal and financial metrics associated with the program. Data gathered were either from their own Vermont Oxford Network outcomes or an institutional clinical database. As each center utilizes their EHMD program in slightly different populations and over different time periods, data presented was center-specific. After all presentations, the experts discussed issues within the field of neonatology that need to be addressed with regards to the utilization of an EHMD in the NICU population.

Results

Implementation of an EHMD program faces many barriers, no matter the NICU size, patient population or geographic location. Successful implementation requires a team approach (including finance and IT support) with a NICU champion. Having pre-specified target populations as well as data tracking is also helpful. Real-world experiences of NICUs with established EHMD programs show reductions in comorbidities, regardless of the institution’s size or level of care. EHMD programs also proved to be cost effective. For the NICUs that had necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC) data available, EHMD programs resulted in either a decrease or change in total (medical + surgical) NEC rate and reductions in surgical NEC. Institutions that provided cost and complications data all reported a substantial cost avoidance after EHMD implementation, ranging between $515,113 and $3,369,515 annually per institution.

Conclusions

The data provided support the initiation of EHMD programs in NICUs for very preterm infants, but there are still methodologic issues to be addressed so that guidelines can be created and all NICUs, regardless of size, can provide standardized care that benefits VLBW infants.

Objectives: Small infants require adequate enteral nutrition to achieve continuous growth. Therefore, breast milk should be supplemented with fortifier. In addition to the cost-efficient fortifiers produced from bovine milk, an expensive fortifier derived from human milk has been available. We compared, whether preterm infants benefit from human fortifier supplementation and whether the higher purchase costs are economically viable for hospitals.

Methods: Preterm infants of <32+0 gestational week and <1000 g birth weight, were enrolled. The newborns were nourished with human milk. Supplementation with human fortifier or bovine fortifier was initiated once oral milk intake reached 100 mL/kg BW/d. Standardized documentation of body weight, respiratory situation, Intraventricular Hemorrhage (IVH), Periventricular Leukomalacia (PVL), Necrotizing Enterocolitis (NEC) and Retinopathy of Prematurity (ROP) and duration of the in-hospital stay was undertaken at day of life 7, 14, 21, 35 and 42. For each individual the revenue was calculated.

Results: Between 01/2019 and 12/2020, 23 children were enrolled. 10 preterms received human and 13 bovine fortifier. 2 infants developed BPD and one required ligature for a Patent Ductus Arteriosus Botalli (PDA) in the children who were supplemented with human milk-based fortifier. Three children in the group fed the bovine fortifier developed BPD, PVL was documented in one, ROP in 2, higher-grade NEC in one and ductus ligature was required by two children. Stool-calprotectin values measured on study days 35 and 42 were significant lower in infants given human fortifier. Nevertheless, the in-hospital stay was shorter in the human fortifier group (median of 75.5 days) than in the bovine fortifier (median of 80 days) group.

Total revenue gain was +39854.20 € (+5958.20 € per patient) in patients fed the human fortifier versus +20573.42 €(-346.00 € per patient) in individuals who received bovine fortifier. The costs for human fortifier supplementation were in total € 41005.00. Bovine fortifier was less expensive (total cost: € 250.00).

Conclusion: Fortifiers produced from human milk entail higher therapeutic costs but are offset by shorter in-hospital stays and fewer morbidities among preterm infants. Preterm infants tolerate human milk-based fortifiers significantly better than bovine-based fortifiers.

Background

Our level III neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) implemented the use of an exclusive human milk diet (EHD) and sought to determine its effect on the severe co-morbidities of preterm infants as well as the potential cost-savings due to the anticipated reduction in these co-morbidities.

Methods

A retrospective cohort study was completed to determine if an EHD statistically decreased the rate of co-morbidities including length of stay (LOS), days on total parental nutrition (TPN), rates of late onset sepsis, necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC), bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD), and severe retinopathy of prematurity (ROP).

Results

An EHD significantly decreased the odds of severe ROP (adjusted odds-ratio (aOR)=0.349; 95%CI [0.156, 0.739]; p=0.008) and late onset sepsis (aOR=0.323; 95%CI [0.123, 0.768]; p=0.014). Analysis of cost-effectiveness of an EHD relative to a BSD based on the incremental costs of these co-morbidities determined the net loss in direct hospital costs per patient were estimated to be $420 in 2016 US dollars; however, given the long-term health-care costs and non-pecuniary damages from the co-morbidities of severe ROP and sepsis this net loss appears negligible.

Conclusion

This study found that an EHD significantly decreased the odds of severe ROP and late onset sepsis; though not significant, there was a positive trend in decreasing cases of medical NEC; our surgical NEC rates dropped to 0. The benefits of human milk are vital, and the costs are nominal.

In this month's issue of Breastfeeding Medicine Katwyk and colleagues present a detailed economic analysis of the cost-effectiveness of providing an exclusive human milk diet to infants in the Newborn Intensive Care Unit of a single Canadian hospital. Exclusive meant feeding solely human milk and supplementing as needed with a human milk-derived fortifier (HMDF).

Background

There is increasing evidence that premature newborns and infants with low birth weight can benefit substantially from an exclusive human milk-based diet (EHMD), consisting of human milk supplemented with a pasteurized donor human milk-derived fortifier. However, compared with the standard infant diet, EHMD also represents a significant added cost to the hospital and/or health system, thereby raising important questions about the economic feasibility of incorporating EHMD into newborn care.

Methods

We conducted a cost analysis and estimated the potential cost savings to a Canadian tertiary hospital based on the attributable complications averted from EHMD among low-weight neonates. A meta-analysis was performed to derive input parameters. A probabilistic analysis was conducted to determine the probability that EHMD is cost saving and 95% confidence interval (CI) around our estimates.

Results

Our findings show that providing EHMD to preterm infants under 750 g at birth and at the highest risk of developing major complications is likely to be cost saving in the amount of $107,567 (95% CI: −145,229 to 360,362) per year. Extending EHMD to higher weight classes may be economically feasible depending on the pricing of the human milk-derived fortifier and the baseline risk of complications in the hospital setting.

Conclusion

This comprehensive study provides critical insight for hospital-based decision makers to evaluate the potential gains and uncertainties associated with improved nutritional care for neonatal patients.

For preterm and very low birthweight infants, the mother’s own milk is the best nutrition. Based on the latest information for mothers who give birth to preterm and very low birthweight infants, medical staff should encourage and assist mothers to pump or express and provide their own milk whenever possible.

(2) If the supply of maternal milk is insufficient even though they receive adequate support, or the mother’s own milk cannot be given to her infant for any reason, donor human milk should be used.

(3) Donors who donate their breast milk need to meet the Guideline of the Japan Human Milk Bank Association.

(4) Donor human milk should be provided according to the medical needs of preterm and very low birthweight infants, regardless of their family’s financial status.

(5) In the future, it will be necessary to create a system to supply an exclusive human milk‐based diet (EHMD), consisting of human milk with the addition of a human milk‐derived human milk fortifier, to preterm and very low birthweight infants.

Objectives

Human milk-based fortifiers have shown a protective effect on major complications for very low birth weight newborns. The current study aimed to estimate the cost-effectiveness of an exclusive human milk diet (EHMD) compared to the current approach using cow’s milk-based fortifiers in very low birth weight newborns.

Methods

A decision tree model using the health states of necrotising enterocolitis (NEC), sepsis, NEC + sepsis and no complication was used to calculate the cost-effectiveness of an EHMD. For each health state, bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD), retinopathy of prematurity (RoP) and neurodevelopmental problems were included as possible complications; additionally, short-bowel syndrome (SBS) was included as a complication for surgical treatment of NEC. The model was stratified into birth weight categories. Costs for inpatient treatment and long-term consequences were considered from a third party payer perspective for the reference year 2017. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed, including a societal perspective, discounting rate and all input parameter-values.

Results

In the base case, the EHMD was estimated to be cost-effective compared to the current nutrition for very low birth weight newborns with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of €28,325 per Life-Year-Gained (LYG). From a societal perspective, the ICER is €27,494/LYG using a friction cost approach and €16,112/LYG using a human capital approach. Deterministic sensitivity analyses demonstrated that the estimate was robust against changes in the input parameters and probabilistic sensitivity analysis suggested that the probability EHMD was cost-effective at a threshold of €45,790/LYG was 94.8 percent.

Conclusion

Adopting EHMD as the standard approach to nutrition is a cost-effective intervention for very low birth weight newborns in Germany.

Background

An exclusive human milk–based diet has been shown to decrease necrotizing enterocolitis and improve outcomes for infants ≤1250 g birth weight. Studies have shown that infants who received an exclusive human milk diet with a donor‐human milk–derived cream supplement (cream) had improved weight and length velocity when the cream was added to mother's own milk or donor‐human milk when energy was <20 kcal/oz using a human milk analyzer. Our objective was to compare growth and cost outcomes of infants ≤1250 g birth weight fed with an exclusive human milk diet, with and without human milk cream, without the use of a human milk analyzer.

Methods

Two cohorts of human milk–fed premature infants were compared from birth to 34 weeks postmenstrual age. Group 1 (2010–2011) received a donor‐human milk fortifier, whereas Group 2 (2015–2016) received donor‐human milk fortifier plus the commercial cream supplement, if weight gain was <15 g/kg/d.

Results

There was no difference in growth between the 2 groups for weight (P = 0.32) or head circumference (P = 0.90). Length velocity was greater for Group 1 (P = 0.03). The mean dose of donor‐human milk fortifier was lower in Group 2 (P < 0.001). Group 2 saved an average of $2318 per patient on the cost of human milk products (P < 0.01).

Conclusions

Infants receiving a human milk diet with cream supplementation for growth faltering achieve appropriate growth in a cost‐effective feeding strategy.

Background

An exclusive human milk diet (EHMD) using human milk based products (pre-term formula and fortifiers) has been shown to lead to significant clinical benefits for very low birth weight (VLBW) babies (below 1250 g). This is expensive relative to diets that include cow’s milk based products, but preliminary economic analyses have shown that the costs are more than offset by a reduction in the cost of neonatal care. However, these economic analyses have not completely assessed the economic implications of EHMD feeding, as they have not considered the range of outcomes affected by it.

Methods

We conducted an economic analysis of EHMD compared to usual practice of care amongst VLBW babies in the US, which is to include cow's milk based products when required. Costs were evaluated from the perspective of the health care payer, with societal costs considered in sensitivity analyses.

Results

An EHMD substantially reduces mortality and improves other health outcomes, as well as generating substantial cost savings of $16,309 per infant by reducing adverse clinical events. Cost savings increase to $117,239 per infant when wider societal costs are included.

Conclusions

An EHMD is dominant in cost-effectiveness terms, that is it is both cost-saving and clinically beneficial, for VLBW babies in a US-based setting.