Du Jian, Gay Melvin C L, Lai Ching Tat, Trengove Robert D, Hartmann Peter E, Geddes Donna T
School of Chemistry and Biochemistry, The University of Western Australia, 35 Stirling Hwy, Crawley, Western Australia 6009, Australia.
School of Chemistry and Biochemistry, The University of Western Australia, 35 Stirling Hwy, Crawley, Western Australia 6009, Australia.
Food Chem. 2017 Feb 15;217:505-510. doi: 10.1016/j.foodchem.2016.08.114. Epub 2016 Aug 29.
The gravimetric method is considered the gold standard for measuring the fat content of human milk. However, it is labor intensive and requires large volumes of human milk. Other methods, such as creamatocrit and esterified fatty acid assay (EFA), have also been used widely in fat analysis. However, these methods have not been compared concurrently with the gravimetric method. Comparison of the three methods was conducted with human milk of varying fat content. Correlations between these methods were high (r(2)=0.99). Statistical differences (P<0.001) were observed in the overall fat measurements and within each group (low, medium and high fat milk) using the three methods. Overall, stronger correlation with lower mean (4.73g/L) and percentage differences (5.16%) was observed with the creamatocrit than the EFA method when compared to the gravimetric method. Furthermore, the ease of operation and real-time analysis make the creamatocrit method preferable.
重量法被认为是测量母乳脂肪含量的金标准。然而，该方法 labor intensive 且需要大量母乳。其他方法，如乳脂比和酯化脂肪酸测定法（EFA），也已广泛用于脂肪分析。然而，这些方法尚未与重量法同时进行比较。使用不同脂肪含量的母乳对这三种方法进行了比较。这些方法之间的相关性很高（r(2)=0.99）。使用这三种方法在总体脂肪测量以及每组（低脂、中脂和高脂母乳）中均观察到统计学差异（P<0.001）。总体而言，与重量法相比，乳脂比法与更低的平均差异（4.73g/L）和百分比差异（5.16%）具有更强的相关性。此外，操作简便和实时分析使得乳脂比法更具优势。 （注：“labor intensive”可能是“劳动强度大”之类的意思，但不确定准确表述，根据上下文大概推测其含义。）
