Donor human milk for preventing necrotising enterocolitis in very preterm or very low-birthweight infants.

IF 8.8 2区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Maria Quigley, Nicholas D Embleton, Nicholas Meader, William McGuire
{"title":"Donor human milk for preventing necrotising enterocolitis in very preterm or very low-birthweight infants.","authors":"Maria Quigley, Nicholas D Embleton, Nicholas Meader, William McGuire","doi":"10.1002/14651858.CD002971.pub6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>When sufficient maternal milk is not available, donor human milk or formula are the alternative forms of enteral nutrition for very preterm or very low-birthweight (VLBW) infants. Donor human milk may retain the non-nutritive benefits of maternal milk and has been proposed as a strategy to reduce the risk of necrotising enterocolitis (NEC) and associated mortality and morbidity in very preterm or VLBW infants.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To assess the effectiveness of donor human milk compared with formula for preventing NEC and associated morbidity and mortality in very preterm or VLBW infants when sufficient maternal milk is not available.</p><p><strong>Search methods: </strong>We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, the Maternity and Infant Care (MIC) database, and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), from the earliest records to February 2024. We searched clinical trials registries and examined the reference lists of included studies.</p><p><strong>Selection criteria: </strong>Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials comparing feeding with donor human milk versus formula in very preterm (< 32 weeks' gestation) or VLBW (< 1500 g) infants.</p><p><strong>Data collection and analysis: </strong>Two review authors evaluated the risk of bias in the trials, extracted data, and synthesised effect estimates using risk ratio, risk difference, and mean difference, with associated 95% confidence intervals. The primary outcomes were NEC, late-onset invasive infection, and all-cause mortality before hospital discharge. The secondary outcomes were growth parameters and neurodevelopment. We used the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of the evidence for our primary outcomes.</p><p><strong>Main results: </strong>Twelve trials with a total of 2296 infants fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Most trials were small (average sample size was 191 infants). All trials were performed in neonatal units in Europe or North America. Five trials were conducted more than 40 years ago; the remaining seven trials were conducted in the year 2000 or later. Some trials had methodological weaknesses, including concerns regarding masking of investigators and selective reporting. Meta-analysis showed that donor human milk reduces the risk of NEC (risk ratio (RR) 0.53, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.37 to 0.76; I² = 4%; risk difference (RD) -0.03, 95% CI -0.05 to -0.01; 11 trials, 2261 infants; high certainty evidence). Donor human milk probably has little or no effect on late-onset invasive infection (RR 1.12, 0.95 to 1.31; I² = 27%; RD 0.03, 95% CI -0.01 to -0.07; 7 trials, 1611 infants; moderate certainty evidence) or all-cause mortality (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.31; I² = 0%; RD -0.00, 95% CI -0.02 to 0.02; 9 trials, 2116 infants; moderate certainty evidence).</p><p><strong>Authors' conclusions: </strong>The evidence shows that donor human milk reduces the risk of NEC by about half in very preterm or VLBW infants. There is probably little or no effect on late-onset invasive infection or all-cause mortality before hospital discharge.</p>","PeriodicalId":10473,"journal":{"name":"Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":8.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11378496/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD002971.pub6","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: When sufficient maternal milk is not available, donor human milk or formula are the alternative forms of enteral nutrition for very preterm or very low-birthweight (VLBW) infants. Donor human milk may retain the non-nutritive benefits of maternal milk and has been proposed as a strategy to reduce the risk of necrotising enterocolitis (NEC) and associated mortality and morbidity in very preterm or VLBW infants.

Objectives: To assess the effectiveness of donor human milk compared with formula for preventing NEC and associated morbidity and mortality in very preterm or VLBW infants when sufficient maternal milk is not available.

Search methods: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, the Maternity and Infant Care (MIC) database, and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), from the earliest records to February 2024. We searched clinical trials registries and examined the reference lists of included studies.

Selection criteria: Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials comparing feeding with donor human milk versus formula in very preterm (< 32 weeks' gestation) or VLBW (< 1500 g) infants.

Data collection and analysis: Two review authors evaluated the risk of bias in the trials, extracted data, and synthesised effect estimates using risk ratio, risk difference, and mean difference, with associated 95% confidence intervals. The primary outcomes were NEC, late-onset invasive infection, and all-cause mortality before hospital discharge. The secondary outcomes were growth parameters and neurodevelopment. We used the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of the evidence for our primary outcomes.

Main results: Twelve trials with a total of 2296 infants fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Most trials were small (average sample size was 191 infants). All trials were performed in neonatal units in Europe or North America. Five trials were conducted more than 40 years ago; the remaining seven trials were conducted in the year 2000 or later. Some trials had methodological weaknesses, including concerns regarding masking of investigators and selective reporting. Meta-analysis showed that donor human milk reduces the risk of NEC (risk ratio (RR) 0.53, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.37 to 0.76; I² = 4%; risk difference (RD) -0.03, 95% CI -0.05 to -0.01; 11 trials, 2261 infants; high certainty evidence). Donor human milk probably has little or no effect on late-onset invasive infection (RR 1.12, 0.95 to 1.31; I² = 27%; RD 0.03, 95% CI -0.01 to -0.07; 7 trials, 1611 infants; moderate certainty evidence) or all-cause mortality (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.31; I² = 0%; RD -0.00, 95% CI -0.02 to 0.02; 9 trials, 2116 infants; moderate certainty evidence).

Authors' conclusions: The evidence shows that donor human milk reduces the risk of NEC by about half in very preterm or VLBW infants. There is probably little or no effect on late-onset invasive infection or all-cause mortality before hospital discharge.

预防极早产儿或极低体重儿坏死性小肠结肠炎的捐赠人奶。
背景:当没有足够的母乳时,供体人乳或配方奶是极早产儿或极低出生体重儿(VLBW)肠道营养的替代形式。供体人乳可保留母乳的非营养性益处,已被建议作为降低极早产儿或极低出生体重儿坏死性小肠结肠炎(NEC)风险及相关死亡率和发病率的一种策略:与配方奶相比,评估供体人乳在预防极早产儿或低体重儿发生坏死性小肠结肠炎及相关发病率和死亡率方面的有效性:我们检索了从最早记录到 2024 年 2 月的 Cochrane 对照试验中央登记册 (CENTRAL)、MEDLINE、Embase、母婴护理 (MIC) 数据库以及护理和联合健康文献累积索引 (CINAHL)。我们检索了临床试验登记处,并检查了纳入研究的参考文献列表:对早产儿(妊娠<32周)或超低体重儿(体重<1500克)使用供体母乳喂养与配方奶粉喂养进行比较的随机或准随机对照试验:两位综述作者对试验的偏倚风险进行了评估,提取了数据,并使用风险比、风险差异和平均差异以及相关的 95% 置信区间对效果估计值进行了综合。主要研究结果为NEC、晚发侵袭性感染和出院前全因死亡率。次要结果为生长参数和神经发育。我们采用 GRADE 方法评估了主要结果的证据确定性:符合纳入标准的有12项试验,共计2296名婴儿。大多数试验规模较小(平均样本量为 191 名婴儿)。所有试验均在欧洲或北美的新生儿科进行。其中五项试验是在40多年前进行的,其余七项试验是在2000年或之后进行的。一些试验在方法上存在缺陷,包括研究人员的掩盖和选择性报告等问题。Meta 分析表明,母乳喂养可降低罹患 NEC 的风险(风险比 (RR) 0.53,95% 置信区间 (CI) 0.37 至 0.76;I² = 4%;风险差异 (RD) -0.03,95% CI -0.05 至 -0.01;11 项试验,2261 名婴儿;高确定性证据)。捐献母乳对晚期侵袭性感染(RR 1.12,0.95 至 1.31;I² = 27%;RD 0.03,95% CI -0.01 至 -0.07;7 项试验,1611 名婴儿;中度确证证据)或全因死亡率(RR 1.00,95% CI 0.76 至 1.31;I² = 0%;RD -0.00,95% CI -0.02 至 0.02;9 项试验,2116 名婴儿;中度确证证据)可能几乎没有影响:证据显示,母乳喂养可将早产儿或低体重儿发生 NEC 的风险降低一半左右。对晚期侵袭性感染或出院前的全因死亡率可能几乎没有影响。
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
CiteScore
10.60
自引率
2.40%
发文量
173
审稿时长
1-2 weeks
期刊介绍: The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR) stands as the premier database for systematic reviews in healthcare. It comprises Cochrane Reviews, along with protocols for these reviews, editorials, and supplements. Owned and operated by Cochrane, a worldwide independent network of healthcare stakeholders, the CDSR (ISSN 1469-493X) encompasses a broad spectrum of health-related topics, including health services.
×
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