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

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.

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

To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of the efficacy and safety of fortification of human milk with human milk-based fortifier versus cow’s milk-based fortifier for use in preterm and/or very low birthweight infants.

Design

Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials comparing the effect of human milk fortification with human milk-based milk fortifier versus cow’s milk-based fortifier in infants born <34 weeks’ gestation and/or with birth weight <1500 g were identified by searching databases, clinical trial registries and reference lists until 5 November 2019. Two authors independently extracted data and assessed evidence quality. Meta-analyses were conducted using fixed or random effects models, as appropriate.

Main outcome measures

Necrotising enterocolitis (Bell’s stage II or higher) and late-onset sepsis.

Results

Of 863 unique records identified, 16 full-text trials were screened and 2 trials involving 334 infants were included. Primary outcome data were available for 332 infants. Use of human milk-based fortifier compared with cow’s milk-based fortifier reduced the risk of necrotising enterocolitis (risk ratio 0.47, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.98). There was no clear evidence of an effect on late-onset sepsis or any other outcomes. The quality of evidence was low to very low due to imprecision and lack of blinding in one study.

Conclusions:

Findings suggest that there is a reduction in the incidence of necrotising enterocolitis with human milk-based fortifiers compared with cow’s milk-based fortifiers. The overall quality of evidence is low. Further appropriately powered trials are required before this intervention can be routinely recommended for preterm infants.

Background:

Very low birthweight (VLBW) preterm infants fed mothers own milk (MOM) need nutritional supplementation, tra-ditionally achieved with cow's milk (CM) derived fortifier CMDF) and preterm formula (PTF) if MOM is insufficient. CM products have been associated with diverse major morbidities. The current recommendation is to preferentially replace PTF with donor milk (DM) to produce a 100% human milk (HM) base diet, usually forti-fied with CMDF.

Objective:

To identify whether CMDF, even when fed with a 100% HM base diet, is related to an increased risk of major morbidities.

Methods:

We identified a randomized trial with an all-HM base diet, comparing CMDF with a fortifier derived from human milk (HMDF), and two additional studies of this design were generated from raw data as subgroup analyses of a randomized con-trolled trial and a quasi-experimental study. Using these studies, we calculated the impact of CMDF on major morbidities of death, necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC), retinopathy of prematurity (ROP), sepsis, bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD) and patent ductus arteriosus (PDA).

Results:

Each study individually provided support for an increase in major morbidities with CMDF. Meta-analyses of pooled data showed that compared to HMDF, the CMDF group had large in-creases in NEC (RR=3.3; P=0.001), ROP (RR=2.2; P=0.007), PDA (RR=1.6; P=0.009), interruption of feeding (RR=3.4; P=0.001) and a positive mortality/morbidity index based on one or more of death, NEC, sepsis, ROP and BPD (RR=1.4; P=0.006).

Conclusions:

Despite the increased use of HM in modern neonatal care as a base diet, we found a greater risk of critical morbidities with CMDF compared with HMDF. This burden of morbidity provides evidence that the benefits of an HM base diet, might be, in part, counteracted by multiple adverse outcomes relating to the use of CMDF.

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.

Methods

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.

Background

Postnatal growth failure (PGF) in very low birthweight (VLBW) infants is a result of factors such as prematurity, acute illness and suboptimal nutritional support. Before this project began, 84% of appropriately grown VLBW infants in our neonatal intensive care unit experienced PGF. The aims of this quality improvement project were to reduce the percentage of infants discharged with PGF to less than 50% within 2 years and to maintain a rate of PGF under 50%.

Methods

All inborn VLBW infants were eligible for this study. Infants with congenital anomalies were excluded. We determined key drivers for optimal nutrition and identified potentially better practices (process measures) based on a review of the literature, which included more rapid initiation of starter total parenteral nutrition (TPN), aggressive use and advancement of regular TPN, and fortification of human milk when the volume of intake reached 80 mL/kg/day. Three Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycles were tested.

Results

Time to initiation of starter TPN was significantly reduced from 5.5 hours to under 3 hours. Regular TPN provided the goals for amino acids and lipids at increased frequency after the first two PDSA cycles. The proportion of infants whose milk was fortified at 80 mL/kg/day increased after the third PDSA cycle.

Conclusions

We found a sustained decrease in the percentage of infants discharged with PGF from 84% at baseline to fewer than 50% beginning in 2010–2011 through 2016, with 23.1% of infants experiencing PGF in 2016. We have achieved improved nutritional support for VLBW infants using the model for improvement.

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

The University of Virginia neonatal intensive care unit is a 51-bed unit with approximately 600 to 700 admissions per year. Despite evidenced-based clinical care, necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC) and feeding intolerance remained problematic.

Purpose

In September 2016, the neonatal intensive care unit implemented an exclusive human milk diet (EHMD) for infants born 1250 g or less with the goal of reducing NEC, feeding intolerance, parenteral nutrition use, and late-onset sepsis. Length of stay, bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD), and retinopathy of prematurity were also evaluated.

Methods

A work group developed systems for charging and documenting products used in an EHMD. Outcomes were compared with a control group of similar infants born prior to the availability of the EHMD.

Results

Infants who received an EHMD had significantly fewer late-onset sepsis evaluations (P = .0027) and less BPD (P = .018). While not statistically significant, less surgical NEC was also demonstrated (4 cases vs 1 case, which was 57% of total NEC cases vs 14.3%) while maintaining desirable weight gain and meeting financial goals.

Background

For preterm infants, human milk (HM) has to be fortified to cover their enhanced nutritional requirements and establish adequate growth. Most HM fortifiers are based on bovine protein sources (BMF). An HM fortifier based on human protein sources (HMF) has become available in the last few years. The aim of this study is to investigate the impact of an HMF versus BMF on growth in extremely low birth weight (ELBW, <1000 g) infants.

Methods

This was a retrospective, controlled, multicenter cohort study in infants with a birthweight below 1000 g. The HMF group received an exclusive HM diet up to 32+0 weeks of gestation and was changed to BMF afterwards. The BMF group received HM+BMF from fortifier introduction up to 37+0 weeks.

Results

192 extremely low birth weight (ELBW)-infants were included (HMF n = 96, BMF n = 96) in the study. After the introduction of fortification, growth velocity up to 32+0 weeks was significantly lower in the HMF group (16.5 g/kg/day) in comparison to the BMF group (18.9 g/kg/day, p = 0.009) whereas all other growth parameters did not differ from birth up to 37+0 weeks. Necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC) incidence was 10% in the HMF and 8% in the BMF group.

Conclusion

Results from this study do not support the superiority of HFM over BMF in ELBW infants.

Background

Human milk-based fortifiers (HMBFs) are being adopted in neonatal care to enrich the nutrients in human milk for very low birth weight (VLBW) infants despite being costly and there being limited efficacy data. No randomized clinical trial has evaluated the use of HMBF compared with bovine milk–based fortifiers (BMBFs) in the absence of formula feeding.

Objective

To determine if HMBF compared with BMBF for routine nutrient enrichment of human milk improves feeding tolerance, reduces morbidity, reduces fecal calprotectin (a measure of gut inflammation), and supports the growth of infants <1250 g.

Design

In this blinded randomized clinical trial, infants born weighing <1250 g were recruited from neonatal units in Ontario, Canada between August 2014 and November 2015. The infants were fed mother's milk and donor milk as required. Fortification commenced at 100 mL/kg per day of HMBF (0.81 kcal/mL) or BMBF (0.72 kcal/mL) and advanced at 140 mL/kg per day to 0.88 and 0.78 kcal/mL, respectively. The primary outcome was percentage of infants with a feeding interruption for ≥12 h or a >50% reduction in feeding volume. Secondary outcomes included a dichotomous mortality and morbidity index (i.e., affirmative for any one of death, late-onset sepsis, necrotizing enterocolitis, chronic lung disease, or severe retinopathy of prematurity), fecal calprotectin, and growth.

Results

Of 232 eligible infants, 127 (54.7%) were randomized (n = 64 HMBF, n = 63 BMBF). Mean ± SD birth weight and gestational age of infants were 888 ± 201 g and 27.7 ± 2.5 wk, respectively. No statistically significant differences were identified in feeding interruptions [17/64 HMBF, 20/61 BMBF; unadjusted risk difference: −6.2% (95% CI: −22.2%, 9.8%)]. There was no statistically significant difference in the mortality and morbidity index (35.9% HMBF, 49.2% BMBF, adjusted P = 0.07), changes in fecal calprotectin, or growth z scores.

Conclusions

Among infants born weighing <1250 g and exclusively fed human milk, the use of HMBF did not improve feeding tolerance or reduce mortality and morbidity compared with BMBF.