Amissah Emma A, Brown Julie, Harding Jane E
Liggins Institute, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Jun 22;6(6):CD000433. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD000433.pub2.
Preterm infants require high protein intake to achieve adequate growth and development. Although breast milk feeding has many benefits for this population, the protein content is highly variable, and inadequate to support rapid infant growth. This is a 2018 update of a Cochrane Review first published in 1999.
To determine whether protein-supplemented human milk compared with unsupplemented human milk, fed to preterm infants, improves growth, body composition, cardio-metabolic, and neurodevelopmental outcomes, without significant adverse effects.
We used the standard search strategy of Cochrane Neonatal to search CENTRAL, MEDLINE via PubMed, Embase, and CINAHL (February 2018). We also searched clinical trials databases, conference proceedings and the reference lists of retrieved articles for randomised controlled trials (RCT) and quasi-randomised trials.
Published and unpublished RCTs were eligible if they used random or quasi-random methods to allocate hospitalised preterm infants who were being fed human milk, to additional protein supplementation or no supplementation.
Two review authors independently abstracted data, assessed risk of bias and the quality of evidence at the outcome level, using GRADE methodology. We performed meta-analyses, using risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous data, and mean difference (MD) for continuous data, with their respective 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We used a fixed-effect model and had planned to explore potential causes of heterogeneity via subgroup or sensitivity analyses.
We included six RCTs, involving 204 preterm infants. Low-quality evidence showed that protein supplementation of human milk increased in-hospital rates of growth in weight (MD 3.82 g/kg/day, 95% CI 2.94 to 4.7; five RCTs, 101 infants; I² = 73%), length (MD 0.12 cm/wk, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.17; four RCTs, 68 infants; I² = 89%), and head circumference (MD 0.06 cm/wk, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.12; four RCTs, 68 infants; I² = 84%). There was no evidence of a clear difference in rate of growth of skin fold thickness between the supplemented and unsupplemented groups (triceps MD 0.06 mm/wk, 95% CI -0.09 to 0.21; one RCT, 20 infants; or subscapular MD 0.00 mm/wk, 95% CI -0.17 to 0.17; one RCT, 20 infants). Protein supplementation led to longer hospital stays (MD 18.5 days, 95% CI 4.39 to 32.61; one RCT, 20 infants; very low-quality evidence), and higher blood urea nitrogen concentrations compared to the unsupplemented group (MD 0.95 mmol/L, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.09; four RCTs, 81 infants; I² = 56%). Very low-quality evidence did not show that protein supplementation clearly increased the risk of feeding intolerance (RR 2.70, 95% CI 0.13 to 58.24; one RCT, 17 infants), or necrotizing enterocolitis (RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.07 to 17.12; one RCT, 76 infants), or clearly altered serum albumin concentrations (MD 2.5 g/L, 95% CI -5.66 to 10.66; one RCT, 11 infants), compared with the unsupplemented groups. No data were available about the effects of protein supplementation on long-term growth, body mass index, body composition, neurodevelopmental, or cardio-metabolic outcomes.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Low-quality evidence showed that protein supplementation of human milk, fed to preterm infants, increased short-term growth. However, the small sample sizes, low precision, and very low-quality evidence regarding duration of hospital stay, feeding intolerance, and necrotising enterocolitis precluded any conclusions about these outcomes. There were no data on outcomes after hospital discharge. Our findings may not be generalisable to low-resource settings, as none of the included studies were conducted in these settings.Since protein supplementation of human milk is now usually done as a component of multi-nutrient fortifiers, future studies should compare different amounts of protein in multi-component fortifiers, and be designed to determine the effects on duration of hospital stay and safety, as well as on long-term growth, body composition, cardio-metabolic, and neurodevelopmental outcomes.
早产儿需要摄入高蛋白以实现充分的生长发育。尽管母乳喂养对这一群体有诸多益处,但其蛋白质含量差异很大,不足以支持婴儿快速生长。这是Cochrane系统评价的2018年更新版,该评价首次发表于1999年。
确定与未补充蛋白质的母乳相比,补充蛋白质的母乳喂养早产儿是否能改善生长、身体成分、心脏代谢和神经发育结局,且无显著不良反应。
我们采用Cochrane新生儿组的标准检索策略,检索了Cochrane中心对照试验注册库(CENTRAL)、通过PubMed检索的MEDLINE、Embase和护理学与健康领域数据库(CINAHL,截至2018年2月)。我们还检索了临床试验数据库、会议论文集以及检索到的文章的参考文献列表,以查找随机对照试验(RCT)和半随机试验。
已发表和未发表的RCT符合入选标准,即这些研究采用随机或半随机方法,将住院接受母乳喂养的早产儿分配至额外补充蛋白质组或不补充蛋白质组。
两位综述作者独立提取数据,使用GRADE方法评估偏倚风险和结局水平的证据质量。我们进行了荟萃分析,二分类数据采用风险比(RR),连续数据采用均值差(MD),并给出各自的95%置信区间(CI)。我们使用固定效应模型,并计划通过亚组分析或敏感性分析探索异质性的潜在原因。
我们纳入了6项RCT,涉及204名早产儿。低质量证据表明,母乳补充蛋白质可提高住院期间的体重增长速率(MD 3.82 g/kg/天,95% CI 2.94至4.7;5项RCT,101名婴儿;I² = 73%)、身长增长速率(MD 0.12 cm/周,95% CI 0.07至0.17;4项RCT,68名婴儿;I² = 89%)和头围增长速率(MD 0.06 cm/周,95% CI 0.01至0.12;4项RCT,68名婴儿;I² = 84%)。没有证据表明补充组和未补充组之间皮褶厚度增长速率存在明显差异(肱三头肌MD 0.06 mm/周,95% CI -0.09至0.21;1项RCT,20名婴儿;或肩胛下MD 0.00 mm/周,95% CI -0.17至0.17;1项RCT,20名婴儿)。与未补充组相比,补充蛋白质导致住院时间延长(MD 18.5天,95% CI 4.39至32.61;1项RCT,20名婴儿;极低质量证据),且血尿素氮浓度更高(MD 0.95 mmol/L,95% CI 0.81至1.09;4项RCT,81名婴儿;I² = 56%)。极低质量证据未表明补充蛋白质明显增加喂养不耐受风险(RR 2.70,95% CI 0.13至58.24;1项RCT,17名婴儿)、坏死性小肠结肠炎风险(RR 1.11,95% CI 0.07至17.12;1项RCT,76名婴儿),或与未补充组相比明显改变血清白蛋白浓度(MD 2.5 g/L,95% CI -5.66至10.66;1项RCT,11名婴儿)。关于补充蛋白质对长期生长、体重指数、身体成分、神经发育或心脏代谢结局的影响,没有可用数据。
低质量证据表明,给早产儿补充蛋白质的母乳可促进短期生长。然而,样本量小、精度低以及关于住院时间、喂养不耐受和坏死性小肠结肠炎的证据质量极低,妨碍了对这些结局得出任何结论。没有出院后结局的数据。由于纳入的研究均未在资源匮乏地区开展,我们的研究结果可能不适用于此类地区。鉴于现在母乳补充蛋白质通常作为多种营养素强化剂的一部分进行,未来研究应比较多成分强化剂中不同蛋白质含量,并设计用于确定其对住院时间和安全性的影响以及对长期生长、身体成分、心脏代谢和神经发育结局的影响。