1.
Impact of macronutrient supplements on later growth of children born preterm or small for gestational age: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised and quasirandomised controlled trials.
Lin, L, Amissah, E, Gamble, GD, Crowther, CA, Harding, JE
PLoS medicine. 2020;(5):e1003122
Abstract
BACKGROUND Nutritional supplements may improve short-term growth of infants born small (preterm or small for gestational age), but there are few data on long-term effects and concerns that body composition may be adversely affected. Effects also may differ between girls and boys. Our systematic review and meta-analysis assessed the effects of macronutrient supplements for infants born small on later growth. METHODS AND FINDINGS We searched OvidMedline, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews from inception to January 30, 2020, and controlled-trials.com, clinicaltrials.gov, and anzctr.org.au on January 30, 2020. Randomised or quasirandomised trials were included if the intention was to increase macronutrient intake to improve growth or development of infants born small and growth was assessed after discharge. Primary outcome was body mass index (BMI) in childhood. Data were pooled using random-effect models. Outcomes were evaluated in toddlers (< 3 years), childhood (3 to 8 years), adolescence (9 to 18 years), and adulthood (>18 years). Forty randomised and 2 quasirandomised trials of variable methodological quality with 4,352 infants were included. Supplementation did not alter BMI in childhood (7 trials, 1,136 children; mean difference [MD] -0.10 kg/m2, [95% confidence interval (CI) -0.37 to 0.16], p = 0.45). In toddlers, supplementation increased weight (31 trials, 2,924 toddlers; MD 0.16 kg, [0.01 to 0.30], p = 0.03) and length/height (30 trials, 2,889 toddlers; MD 0.44 cm, [0.10 to 0.77], p = 0.01), but not head circumference (29 trials, 2,797 toddlers; MD 0.15 cm, [-0.03 to 0.33], p = 0.10). In childhood, there were no significant differences between groups in height (7 trials, 1,136 children; MD 0.22 cm, [-0.48 to 0.92], p = 0.54) or lean mass (3 trials, 354 children; MD -0.07 kg, [-0.98 to 0.85], p = 0.88), although supplemented children appeared to have higher fat mass (2 trials, 201 children; MD 0.79 kg, [0.19 to 1.38], p = 0.01). In adolescence, there were no significant differences between groups in BMI (2 trials, 216 adolescents; MD -0.48 kg/m2, [-2.05 to 1.08], p = 0.60), height (2 trials, 216 adolescents; MD -0.55 cm, [-2.95 to 1.86], p = 0.65), or fat mass (2 trials, 216 adolescents; MD -1.3 5 kg, [-5.76 to 3.06], p = 0.55). In adulthood, there also were no significant differences between groups in weight z-score (2 trials, 199 adults; MD -0.11, [-0.72 to 0.50], p = 0.73) and height z-score (2 trials, 199 adults; MD -0.07, [-0.36 to 0.22], p = 0.62). In subgroup analysis, supplementation was associated with increased length/height in toddler boys (2 trials, 173 boys; MD 1.66 cm, [0.75 to 2.58], p = 0.0003), but not girls (2 trials, 159 girls; MD 0.15 cm, [-0.71 to 1.01], p = 0.74). Limitations include considerable unexplained heterogeneity, low to very low quality of evidence, and possible bias due to low or unbalanced followup. CONCLUSIONS In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we found no evidence that early macronutrient supplementation for infants born small altered BMI in childhood. Although supplements appeared to increase weight and length in toddlers, effects were inconsistent and unlikely to be clinically significant. Limited data suggested that supplementation increased fat mass in childhood, but these effects did not persist in later life. PROSPERO registration: CRD42019126918.
2.
The Impact of Human Milk on Necrotizing Enterocolitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Altobelli, E, Angeletti, PM, Verrotti, A, Petrocelli, R
Nutrients. 2020;(5)
Abstract
BACKGROUND Premature infants receiving breastfeed have a lower incidence of NEC than those fed preterm formula. This study aimed: (1) to update a systematic review and meta-analyses to evaluate the relationship between feeding and necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC) in low weight premature infants; (2) to conduct meta-regression analyses by subgroups; (3) to describe geographical distribution of milk banks in the world. METHODS Papers included in the meta-analysis were updated as of June 2019. Relative risks were used as a measure of effect size. Random effect models were used to account for different sources of variation among studies. For milk banks, the data reviewed by the literature were integrated with the information collected from countries' institutional sites and milk bank networks. RESULTS Thirty-two papers were included in meta-analysis: six randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 26 observational studies (OS). The census has found 572 milk banks around in the world. Brazil has the most active milk banks. RCTs meta-analysis indicates a risk reduction of NEC using human milk respect to formula: Relative risk (RR) = 0.62 (0.42-0.93). Seven OS compared quantities lower than human milk or higher than the 50th quantile showing a risk reduction of NEC:RR = 0.51 (0.31-0.85); 3 OS that evaluated human milk versus mixed feeding showing that human milk has a protective role on the development of NEC:RR = 0.74 (0.63-0.91). Results of subgroups analysis show that the risk reduction is statistically significant only for studies in which premature infants are given both their own and donated breastmilk. CONCLUSIONS The possibility of preserving human milk and promoting donations guarantees an improvement in the health of newborns.
3.
Home fortification of foods with multiple micronutrient powders for health and nutrition in children under two years of age.
Suchdev, PS, Jefferds, MED, Ota, E, da Silva Lopes, K, De-Regil, LM
The Cochrane database of systematic reviews. 2020;(2):CD008959
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
BACKGROUND Vitamin and mineral deficiencies, particularly those of iron, vitamin A, and zinc, affect more than two billion people worldwide. Young children are highly vulnerable because of rapid growth and inadequate dietary practices. Multiple micronutrient powders (MNPs) are single-dose packets containing multiple vitamins and minerals in powder form, which are mixed into any semi-solid food for children six months of age or older. The use of MNPs for home or point-of-use fortification of complementary foods has been proposed as an intervention for improving micronutrient intake in children under two years of age. In 2014, MNP interventions were implemented in 43 countries and reached over three million children. This review updates a previous Cochrane Review, which has become out-of-date. OBJECTIVES To assess the effects and safety of home (point-of-use) fortification of foods with MNPs on nutrition, health, and developmental outcomes in children under two years of age. For the purposes of this review, home fortification with MNP refers to the addition of powders containing vitamins and minerals to semi-solid foods immediately before consumption. This can be done at home or at any other place that meals are consumed (e.g. schools, refugee camps). For this reason, MNPs are also referred to as point-of-use fortification. SEARCH METHODS We searched the following databases up to July 2019: CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and eight other databases. We also searched four trials registers, contacted relevant organisations and authors of included studies to identify any ongoing or unpublished studies, and searched the reference lists of included studies. SELECTION CRITERIA We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs with individual randomisation or cluster-randomisation. Participants were infants and young children aged 6 to 23 months at the time of intervention, with no identified specific health problems. The intervention consisted of consumption of food fortified at the point of use with MNP formulated with at least iron, zinc, and vitamin A, compared with placebo, no intervention, or use of iron-containing supplements, which is standard practice. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Two review authors independently assessed the eligibility of studies against the inclusion criteria, extracted data from included studies, and assessed the risk of bias of included studies. We reported categorical outcomes as risk ratios (RRs) or odds ratios (ORs), with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), and continuous outcomes as mean differences (MDs) and 95% CIs. We used the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of evidence. MAIN RESULTS We included 29 studies (33,147 children) conducted in low- and middle-income countries in Asia, Africa, Latin America, and the Caribbean, where anaemia is a public health problem. Twenty-six studies with 27,051 children contributed data. The interventions lasted between 2 and 44 months, and the powder formulations contained between 5 and 22 nutrients. Among the 26 studies contributing data, 24 studies (26,486 children) compared the use of MNP versus no intervention or placebo; the two remaining studies compared the use of MNP versus an iron-only supplement (iron drops) given daily. The main outcomes of interest were related to anaemia and iron status. We assessed most of the included studies at low risk of selection and attrition bias. We considered some studies to be at high risk of performance and detection bias due to lack of blinding. Most studies were funded by government programmes or foundations; only two were funded by industry. Home fortification with MNP, compared with no intervention or placebo, reduced the risk of anaemia in infants and young children by 18% (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.76 to 0.90; 16 studies; 9927 children; moderate-certainty evidence) and iron deficiency by 53% (RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.56; 7 studies; 1634 children; high-certainty evidence). Children receiving MNP had higher haemoglobin concentrations (MD 2.74 g/L, 95% CI 1.95 to 3.53; 20 studies; 10,509 children; low-certainty evidence) and higher iron status (MD 12.93 μg/L, 95% CI 7.41 to 18.45; 7 studies; 2612 children; moderate-certainty evidence) at follow-up compared with children receiving the control intervention. We did not find an effect on weight-for-age (MD 0.02, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.07; 10 studies; 9287 children; moderate-certainty evidence). Few studies reported morbidity outcomes (three to five studies each outcome) and definitions varied, but MNP did not increase diarrhoea, upper respiratory infection, malaria, or all-cause morbidity. In comparison with daily iron supplementation, the use of MNP produced similar results for anaemia (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.39; 1 study; 145 children; low-certainty evidence) and haemoglobin concentrations (MD -2.81 g/L, 95% CI -10.84 to 5.22; 2 studies; 278 children; very low-certainty evidence) but less diarrhoea (RR 0.52, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.72; 1 study; 262 children; low-certainty of evidence). However, given the limited quantity of data, these results should be interpreted cautiously. Reporting of death was infrequent, although no trials reported deaths attributable to the intervention. Information on side effects and morbidity, including malaria and diarrhoea, was scarce. It appears that use of MNP is efficacious among infants and young children aged 6 to 23 months who are living in settings with different prevalences of anaemia and malaria endemicity, regardless of intervention duration. MNP intake adherence was variable and in some cases comparable to that achieved in infants and young children receiving standard iron supplements as drops or syrups. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS Home fortification of foods with MNP is an effective intervention for reducing anaemia and iron deficiency in children younger than two years of age. Providing MNP is better than providing no intervention or placebo and may be comparable to using daily iron supplementation. The benefits of this intervention as a child survival strategy or for developmental outcomes are unclear. Further investigation of morbidity outcomes, including malaria and diarrhoea, is needed. MNP intake adherence was variable and in some cases comparable to that achieved in infants and young children receiving standard iron supplements as drops or syrups.
4.
Donor human milk and risk of surgical necrotizing enterocolitis: A meta-analysis.
Silano, M, Milani, GP, Fattore, G, Agostoni, C
Clinical nutrition (Edinburgh, Scotland). 2019;(3):1061-1066
Abstract
BACKGROUND & AIM: The prevention of necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC) is a primary goal in the care of preterm and low birth-weight infants. Donor-banked milk (DM)-feeding has been reported to have a protective effect towards NEC with respect to formula-feeding. All the meta-analysis published so far, have been focused on the protective effect of DM on the overall risk of NEC, none of them focused on the risk of the most severe cases on NEC only, that are those requiring surgery. We conducted a meta-analysis of available evidences on the risk of developing surgical cases of NEC in DM-fed preterm and/or low birth weight infants with respect to those formula-fed. METHODS A search for articles published between January 1960 and January 2018 and addressing the association between DM and surgical NEC was conducted via PubMed, Embase and Cochrane database. We included randomized controlled clinical trials, reporting primary data and involving preterm and/or low birth weight infants fed with preterm formula compared to DM, both as sole diet or complementing own mother's milk. Estimates were pooled using random-effects. Study quality was assessed by GRADE score and risk of bias by the Review Manager software tool. RESULTS Four papers were included in the meta-analysis. DM did not exert a beneficial effect of DM on the risk of preventing surgical NEC with respect to formula (RR: 0.45; 95% CI: 0.19-1.09). CONCLUSIONS This meta-analysis indicates that DM does not exert a clear protective effect, on the surgical cases of NEC with respect to preterm formula. Since DM feeding implies remarkable extra cost for the preparation, storage and delivery of the milk with respect to preterm formula, stronger evidences are required to recommend this type of feeding as a preventive strategy for surgical NEC. Mother's milk, when available, could represents the best choice. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER CRD42015020296.