Comparison of prematurity-related outcomes and complications in very low birth weight (VLBW) neonates fed with mother`s own milk versus donor milk: a comparative study.

Majid Karoobi, Amir Azimi, Hamed Zarei, Maryam Saboute, Nasrin Khalessi, Zahra Vahedi
{"title":"Comparison of prematurity-related outcomes and complications in very low birth weight (VLBW) neonates fed with mother`s own milk versus donor milk: a comparative study.","authors":"Majid Karoobi, Amir Azimi, Hamed Zarei, Maryam Saboute, Nasrin Khalessi, Zahra Vahedi","doi":"10.24953/turkjped.2023.684","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>When mother`s own milk (MOM) is unavailable or insufficient, donor milk (DM) from a human milk bank serves as an alternative feeding option. Our study sought to investigate and compare the outcomes and complications of very low birth weight (VLBW) preterm infants who receive MOM versus DM.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this retrospective cohort study conducted between 2018 and 2022, we compared 70 VLBW preterm infants exclusively fed with DM to 70 randomly selected counterparts fed with MOM. Both groups began enteral feeding within 72 hours of birth. Various clinical outcomes were investigated during a three-month follow-up. The clinical outcomes were compared via independent t-tests, Mann-Whitney U, and Fisher`s exact test.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mean gestational age of the infants who were included was 29.6 ± 1.6 weeks, 84 (60%) were males, and the average birth weight was 1217 ± 151 grams. Both groups had similar baseline characteristics. The results of the study demonstrated no statistically significant differences between the groups in terms of hospital length of stay (37±16.3 days in MOM vs 40.3±16.9 days in DM group, P= 0.17), growth rate (13±4 gram/day in MOM vs 13±4 gram/day in DM group, P=0.51), growth velocity (9.8±3.0g/kg/d in MOM vs 9.5±3.2 g/kg/d in DM group), infants with in-hospital vomiting (51 cases in MOM vs 59 cases in DM group, P=0.15),vomiting frequency (1.3±1.1 times in MOM vs 1.5±1.0 times in DM group), incidence of retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) (4 cases in MOM vs 5 cases in DM group, P > 0.999) and incidence of bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD) (7 cases in MOM vs 6 cases in DM group, P > 0.999).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our study findings indicate that the utilization of DM didn`t have a substantial negative impact on infants` outcomes nor any complications in comparison with MOM.</p>","PeriodicalId":101314,"journal":{"name":"The Turkish journal of pediatrics","volume":"66 1","pages":"25-31"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Turkish journal of pediatrics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.24953/turkjped.2023.684","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: When mother`s own milk (MOM) is unavailable or insufficient, donor milk (DM) from a human milk bank serves as an alternative feeding option. Our study sought to investigate and compare the outcomes and complications of very low birth weight (VLBW) preterm infants who receive MOM versus DM.

Methods: In this retrospective cohort study conducted between 2018 and 2022, we compared 70 VLBW preterm infants exclusively fed with DM to 70 randomly selected counterparts fed with MOM. Both groups began enteral feeding within 72 hours of birth. Various clinical outcomes were investigated during a three-month follow-up. The clinical outcomes were compared via independent t-tests, Mann-Whitney U, and Fisher`s exact test.

Results: The mean gestational age of the infants who were included was 29.6 ± 1.6 weeks, 84 (60%) were males, and the average birth weight was 1217 ± 151 grams. Both groups had similar baseline characteristics. The results of the study demonstrated no statistically significant differences between the groups in terms of hospital length of stay (37±16.3 days in MOM vs 40.3±16.9 days in DM group, P= 0.17), growth rate (13±4 gram/day in MOM vs 13±4 gram/day in DM group, P=0.51), growth velocity (9.8±3.0g/kg/d in MOM vs 9.5±3.2 g/kg/d in DM group), infants with in-hospital vomiting (51 cases in MOM vs 59 cases in DM group, P=0.15),vomiting frequency (1.3±1.1 times in MOM vs 1.5±1.0 times in DM group), incidence of retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) (4 cases in MOM vs 5 cases in DM group, P > 0.999) and incidence of bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD) (7 cases in MOM vs 6 cases in DM group, P > 0.999).

Conclusion: Our study findings indicate that the utilization of DM didn`t have a substantial negative impact on infants` outcomes nor any complications in comparison with MOM.

用母乳喂养极低出生体重儿与用捐赠母乳喂养新生儿的早产相关结果和并发症的比较:一项比较研究。
背景:当母奶(MOM)不可用或不足时,来自母乳库的捐赠奶(DM)可作为替代喂养选择。我们的研究旨在调查和比较极低出生体重(VLBW)早产儿接受 MOM 与 DM 的结果和并发症:在这项于 2018 年至 2022 年进行的回顾性队列研究中,我们比较了 70 名完全使用 DM 喂养的 VLBW 早产儿和 70 名随机挑选的使用 MOM 喂养的同类早产儿。两组婴儿均在出生后 72 小时内开始肠内喂养。在三个月的随访期间,对各种临床结果进行了调查。临床结果通过独立t检验、曼-惠特尼U检验和费雪精确检验进行比较:结果:纳入研究的婴儿的平均胎龄为 29.6 ± 1.6 周,其中 84 名(60%)为男性,平均出生体重为 1217 ± 151 克。两组婴儿的基线特征相似。研究结果显示,两组在住院时间(MOM 组为 37±16.3 天 vs DM 组为 40.3±16.9 天,P= 0.17)、生长速度(MOM 组为 13±4 克/天 vs DM 组为 13±4 克/天,P=0.51)、生长速度(MOM 组为 9.8±3.0 克/千克/天 vs DM 组为 9.5±3.2克/千克/天)、院内呕吐婴儿(MOM组51例 vs DM组59例,P=0.15)、呕吐次数(MOM组1.3±1.1次 vs DM组1.5±1.0次)、早产儿视网膜病变(ROP)发生率(MOM组4例 vs DM组5例,P>0.999)和支气管肺发育不良(BPD)发生率(MOM组7例 vs DM组6例,P>0.999):我们的研究结果表明,与MOM相比,使用DM对婴儿的预后和任何并发症都没有实质性的负面影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信