Search

Background: Emerging evidence suggests intakes of protein and energy as early as the first week of life in preterm very low birth weight (VLBW) infants are associated with improved neurodevelopment. In response, many neonatal intensive care units (NICUs) have launched new, more aggressive early feeding guidelines. The aim of this study was to evaluate enteral and parenteral energy and macronutrient intakes during the first postnatal week in VLBW infants admitted to NICUs that have introduced more aggressive early feeding guidelines.Materials and Methods: Estimated energy and macronutrient intakes were prospectively collected from VLBW infants fed exclusively mother's own milk and/or parenteral nutrition and compared with expert recommendations. Days to reach full enteral feeds (150 mL/kg/d) and discharge anthropometrics were examined.Results: By days 6 and 7, median protein and lipid intakes, respectively, reached recommended values (3.5 and 3.0 g/kg/d). However, by day 8, many infants remained below recommended intakes for protein (34%), lipid (34%), carbohydrate (68%), and energy (71%). Late-onset sepsis was associated with a decreased likelihood of reaching full enteral feeds on any given day (hazard ratio, 0.2; 95% confidence interval, 0.1-0.5; P ≤ .0009). There was no significant relationship between week 1 nutrient intakes and anthropometrics at discharge.Conclusion: Despite the introduction of more aggressive early feeding guidelines and improved energy and nutrient intakes compared with literature values, many VLBW infants remain below recommended nutrition goals in the first week. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Bovine milk-based fortifiers (BMBF) have been standard of care for nutrient fortification of feeds for very low birth weight (VLBW) infants, however, there is increasing use of human milk-based fortifiers (HMBF) in neonatal care despite additional costs and limited supporting data. No randomized clinical trial has followed infants fed these fortifiers after initial hospitalization. Objective To compare neurodevelopment in infants born weighing <1250 g fed maternal milk with supplemental donor milk and either a HMBF or BMBF. Methods This is a follow-up of a completed pragmatic, triple-blind, parallel group randomized clinical trial conducted in Southern Ontario between August 2014 and March 2016 (NCT02137473) with feeding tolerance as the primary outcome. Infants weighing <1250 g at birth were block randomized by an online third-party service to receive either HMBF (n  = 64) or BMBF (n  = 63) added to maternal milk with supplemental donor milk during hospitalization. Neurodevelopment was assessed at 18-mo corrected age using the Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development , Third Edition. Follow-up was completed in October 2017. Results Of the 127 infants randomized, 109 returned for neurodevelopmental assessment. No statistically significant differences between fortifiers were identified for cognitive composite scores [adjusted mean scores 94.7 in the HMBF group and 95.9 in the BMBF group; fully adjusted mean difference, −1.1 (95% CI: −6.5 to 4.4)], language composite scores [adjusted scores 92.4 in the HMBF group and 93.1 in the BMBF; fully adjusted mean difference, −1.2 (−7.5 to 5.1)], or motor composite scores [adjusted scores 95.6 in the HMBF group and 97.7 in the BMBF; fully adjusted mean difference, −1.1 (−6.3 to 4.2)]. There was no difference in the proportion of participants that died or had neurodevelopmental impairment or disability between groups. Conclusions Providing HMBF compared with BMBF does not improve neurodevelopmental scores at 18-mo corrected age in infants born <1250 g otherwise fed a human milk diet. This trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT02137473. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]