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. 2019 Jul 19;7(7):CD002971. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD002971.pub5.
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; 2019, Issue 5), Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (3 May 2019), as well as conference proceedings, previous reviews, and clinical trials.
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 certainty of evidence for the main comparison at the outcome level using GRADE methods.
Twelve trials with a total of 1879 infants fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Four trials compared standard term formula versus donor breast milk and eight compared nutrient-enriched preterm formula versus donor breast milk. Only the five 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. Most of the included trials were funded by companies that made the study formula.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). These meta-analyses contained high levels of heterogeneity. 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 0.05; number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) 33, 95% CI 20 to 100; 9 studies, 1675 infants).The GRADE certainty 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, moderate-certainty evidence indicates that 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.
当无法获得足够的母乳时,早产或低出生体重(LBW)婴儿的替代肠内营养形式为捐赠母乳或人工配方奶粉。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,使用人工配方奶粉喂养可能会确保更稳定地提供更多营养。对于早产或低出生体重婴儿,喂养配方奶粉与捐赠母乳的风险和益处平衡尚不确定。
确定与捐赠母乳相比,用配方奶粉喂养对早产或低出生体重(LBW)婴儿生长发育的影响。
我们使用了Cochrane新生儿检索策略,包括对Cochrane对照试验中央注册库(CENTRAL;2019年第5期)、Ovid MEDLINE、Embase以及护理及相关健康文献累积索引(2019年5月3日)进行电子检索,以及会议论文集、既往综述和临床试验。
比较早产或低出生体重婴儿配方奶粉喂养与捐赠母乳喂养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纳入资格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,并报告二分数据的风险比(RRs)和风险差异(RDs),以及连续数据的平均差异(MDs),并分别给出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GRADE方法在结局层面评估主要比较的证据确定性。
共有12项试验、1879名婴儿符合纳入标准。4项试验比较了足月儿标准配方奶粉与捐赠母乳,另外8项试验比较了营养强化早产儿配方奶粉与捐赠母乳。只有最近的5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缺陷,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。大多数纳入试验由生产研究配方奶粉的公司资助。
配方奶粉喂养的婴儿住院期间体重增加率更高(平均差异(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)以及头围增长更快(MD 0.85,95% CI 0.47至1.23 mm/周)。这些Meta分析存在高度异质性。我们未发现对长期生长或神经发育有影响的证据。配方奶粉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0.05;额外出现一个有害结局的需治疗人数(NNTH)33,95% CI 20至100;9项研究,1675名婴儿)。
对于体重增加率、线性生长和头围增长,GRADE证据确定性为中等(因高度异质性而降级),对于神经发育障碍、全因死亡率和坏死性小肠结肠炎,证据确定性也为中等(因不精确性而降级)。
对于早产和低出生体重婴儿,中等确定性证据表明,与捐赠母乳相比,无论是作为母亲挤出母乳的补充还是作为唯一饮食,使用配方奶粉喂养会导致更高的体重增加率、线性生长和头围增长,以及发生坏死性小肠结肠炎的风险更高。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。