Human breast milk fortification with human milk fortifier vs preterm infant formula: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Q2 Medicine
Ni Nyoman Berlian Aryadevi, Rosita Saumi Imanta Putri, Putri Maharani Tristanita Marsubrin
{"title":"Human breast milk fortification with human milk fortifier vs preterm infant formula: A systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Ni Nyoman Berlian Aryadevi, Rosita Saumi Imanta Putri, Putri Maharani Tristanita Marsubrin","doi":"10.1177/19345798251350987","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>BackgroundThe limited availability and high cost of human milk fortifier (HMF) in developing countries represent significant challenges. Preterm formula (PTF) fortification of breast milk is a potential alternative, but its safety and impact on growth are still uncertain. This study compares the safety and effect of breast milk fortification with PTF versus HMF on growth velocity in very low birth weight preterm infants.MethodsA thorough literature search was conducted in the PubMed, Scopus, Google Scholar, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Europe PMC databases up to March 24, 2024. Relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) studying fortifying breast milk with PTF or HMF were identified and their quality assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool. Statistical analysis was performed in Review Manager Web, and certainty of evidence was assessed with GRADE.ResultsSix RCTs were included, of which one exhibited low bias risk, three had moderate concerns, and two were classed as high risk. The six RCTs, involving 434 preterm infants, revealed no significant differences in the gain of weight (SMD 0, 95% CI -0.19 to 0.19), length (MD -0.01 cm/wk, 95% CI -0.06 to 0.05), or head circumference (MD -0.01 cm/wk, 95% CI -0.06 to 0.04) between PTF and HMF. There were comparable risks of morbidities.ConclusionVery low certainty evidence suggests that breast milk fortification with PTF may be a safe alternative to HMF, with similar safety profiles and effects on growth.</p>","PeriodicalId":16537,"journal":{"name":"Journal of neonatal-perinatal medicine","volume":" ","pages":"19345798251350987"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of neonatal-perinatal medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/19345798251350987","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

BackgroundThe limited availability and high cost of human milk fortifier (HMF) in developing countries represent significant challenges. Preterm formula (PTF) fortification of breast milk is a potential alternative, but its safety and impact on growth are still uncertain. This study compares the safety and effect of breast milk fortification with PTF versus HMF on growth velocity in very low birth weight preterm infants.MethodsA thorough literature search was conducted in the PubMed, Scopus, Google Scholar, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Europe PMC databases up to March 24, 2024. Relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) studying fortifying breast milk with PTF or HMF were identified and their quality assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool. Statistical analysis was performed in Review Manager Web, and certainty of evidence was assessed with GRADE.ResultsSix RCTs were included, of which one exhibited low bias risk, three had moderate concerns, and two were classed as high risk. The six RCTs, involving 434 preterm infants, revealed no significant differences in the gain of weight (SMD 0, 95% CI -0.19 to 0.19), length (MD -0.01 cm/wk, 95% CI -0.06 to 0.05), or head circumference (MD -0.01 cm/wk, 95% CI -0.06 to 0.04) between PTF and HMF. There were comparable risks of morbidities.ConclusionVery low certainty evidence suggests that breast milk fortification with PTF may be a safe alternative to HMF, with similar safety profiles and effects on growth.

母乳强化与母乳强化剂vs早产儿配方奶粉:一项系统回顾和荟萃分析。
在发展中国家,人乳强化剂(HMF)的有限可得性和高成本构成了重大挑战。早产儿配方奶粉(PTF)强化母乳是一种潜在的替代品,但其安全性和对生长的影响仍不确定。本研究比较了PTF和HMF母乳强化对极低出生体重早产儿生长速度的安全性和影响。方法对截至2024年3月24日的PubMed、Scopus、谷歌Scholar、ClinicalTrials.gov和Europe PMC数据库进行全面的文献检索。对研究添加PTF或HMF强化母乳的相关随机对照试验(rct)进行识别,并使用Cochrane风险偏倚2工具对其质量进行评估。在Review Manager Web中进行统计分析,并使用GRADE评估证据的确定性。结果纳入6项随机对照试验,其中1项为低偏倚风险,3项为中等偏倚风险,2项为高风险。涉及434名早产儿的6项随机对照试验显示,PTF和HMF在体重增加(SMD为0,95% CI为-0.19至0.19)、长度(MD为-0.01厘米/周,95% CI为-0.06至0.05)或头围(MD为-0.01厘米/周,95% CI为-0.06至0.04)方面没有显著差异。发病率的风险是相当的。结论极低确定性的证据表明,添加PTF的母乳强化可能是HMF的安全替代品,其安全性和对生长的影响相似。
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
Journal of neonatal-perinatal medicine
Journal of neonatal-perinatal medicine Medicine-Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
124
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信