Quigley Maria, Embleton Nicholas D, McGuire William
National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, University of Oxford, Old Road Campus, Oxford, UK, 0X3 7LF.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Jun 20;6(6):CD002971. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD002971.pub4.
When 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.
To determine the effect of feeding with formula compared with donor breast milk on growth and development in preterm or low birth weight (LBW) infants.
We 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.
Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing feeding with formula versus donor breast milk in preterm or LBW infants.
Two 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.
Eleven 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' CONCLUSIONS: In 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.
当无法获得充足的母乳时,早产或低出生体重婴儿的肠内营养替代形式为捐赠母乳或人工配方奶。捐赠母乳可能会保留母乳对早产或低出生体重婴儿的一些非营养益处。然而,喂食人工配方奶可能能确保更稳定地提供更多营养。对于早产或低出生体重婴儿,喂食配方奶与捐赠母乳的风险和益处平衡尚不确定。
确定与喂食捐赠母乳相比,喂食配方奶对早产或低出生体重婴儿生长发育的影响。
我们采用Cochrane新生儿检索策略,包括对Cochrane对照试验中心注册库(CENTRAL;2017年第6期)、Ovid MEDLINE、Embase和护理及相关健康文献累积索引(截至2017年6月8日)进行电子检索,以及检索会议论文集和以往的综述。
比较早产或低出生体重婴儿喂食配方奶与捐赠母乳的随机或半随机对照试验(RCT)。
两名综述作者独立评估试验的合格性和偏倚风险并提取数据。我们按照各试验中的描述分析治疗效果,对于二分数据报告风险比(RRs)和风险差异(RDs),对于连续数据报告均值差异(MDs),并给出各自的95%置信区间(CIs)。我们在Meta分析中使用固定效应模型,并在亚组分析中探索异质性的潜在原因。我们使用“推荐分级的评估、制定与评价”(GRADE)方法在结局层面评估主要比较的证据质量。
共有11项试验符合纳入标准,总计1809名婴儿参与。4项试验比较了标准足月儿配方奶与捐赠母乳,7项试验比较了营养强化早产儿配方奶与捐赠母乳。只有最近的4项试验使用了营养强化捐赠母乳。这些试验在方法学质量上存在各种弱点,特别是4项试验存在分配隐藏问题,且大多数试验缺乏盲法。喂食配方奶的婴儿住院期间体重增加率更高(均值差异(MD)2.51,95%置信区间(CI)1.93至3.08 g/kg/天)、线性生长更快(MD 1.21,95% CI 0.77至1.65 mm/周)和头围增长更快(MD 0.85,95% CI 0.47至1.23 mm/周)。我们未发现对长期生长或神经发育有影响的证据。配方奶喂养增加了坏死性小肠结肠炎的风险(典型风险比(RR)1.87,95% CI 1.23至2.85;风险差异(RD)0.03,95% CI 0.01至0.06)。对于体重增加率、线性生长和头围增长,GRADE证据质量为中等(因异质性程度高而降级),对于神经发育障碍、全因死亡率和坏死性小肠结肠炎,证据质量为中等(因精确性不足而降级)。
在早产和低出生体重婴儿中,与喂食捐赠母乳相比,喂食配方奶,无论是作为母亲挤出母乳的补充还是作为唯一饮食,都会导致更高的体重增加率(线性生长和头围增长)以及更高的坏死性小肠结肠炎发生风险。试验数据未显示对全因死亡率、长期生长或神经发育有影响。