The fear of necrotizing enterocolitis versus achieving optimal growth in preterm infants--an opinion

Impact of time to full enteral feeding on long-term neurodevelopment without mediating by postnatal growth failure in very-low-birth-weight-infants

This study aimed to determine if time to achieve full enteral feeding (TFF) directly impacted long-term neurodevelopmental delay (NDD) and whether long-term postnatal growth failure (PGF) was a mediator of this association in very-low-birth-weight (VLBW) infants. Using prospectively collected cohort data from the Korean Neonatal Network, we included eligible VLBW infants who achieved TFF at least once and classified enrolled infants into four groups using exposure severity (P1 to P4 as TFF < 16, 16-30, 31-45, and > 45 postnatal days, respectively). After adjusting for confounding variables, survival without NDD was significantly decreased in P4 infants compared with that in P2 infants. P1 infants had a lower risk of weight and height PGF than P2 infants; however, P4 infants had higher risks of height and head circumference PGF than P2 infants. Weight and height PGF were significantly associated with an increased risk of NDD. In mediation analysis, early and delayed TFF revealed direct positive and negative impacts, respectively, on the risk of NDD without mediation by PGF. TFF impacted survival without NDD, and PGF did not mediate this association in VLBW infants. Additionally, these results can be translated into evidence-based quality improvement practice.

Nurse-Driven Interventions for Improving ELBW Neurodevelopmental Outcomes

Survival rates for extremely low-birth-weight (ELBW) infants are improving as neurodevelopmental impairment (NDI) rates stay stable, thereby increasing the overall number of infants with NDI. Although there are many determinants of NDI in this population, nutritional factors are of interest because they are readily modifiable in the clinical setting. Nurses can influence nutritional factors such as improving access to human milk feeding, using growth monitoring, establishing feeding policies, implementing oral care with colostrum, facilitating kangaroo care, and providing lactation education for the mother. All of these measures assist in leading to a decrease in NDI rates among ELBW infants.

Clinical and growth outcomes after meconium-related ileus improved with Gastrografin enema in very low birth weight infants

Background

Meconium-related ileus in very low birth weight infants can lead to increased morbidity or mortality and prolonged hospitalization without prompt diagnosis and treatment. This study primarily aimed to identify the incidence of and factors associated with meconium-related ileus and secondarily sought to investigate clinical and growth outcomes after water-soluble contrast media (Gastrografin) enema.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed medical records of very low birth weight infants born between February 2009 and March 2019 in the neonatal intensive care unit of a single medical center. Perinatal factors, clinical outcomes, and growth outcomes were compared between the group with meconium-related ileus that received Gastrografin enema and the control group.

Results

Twenty-four (6.9%) patients were diagnosed with meconium-related ileus among 347 very low birth weight infants. All achieved successful evacuation of meconium with an average of 2.8 (range: 1–8) Gastrografin enema attempts without procedure-related complications. Initiation of Gastrografin enema was performed at mean 7.0 days (range: 2–16) after birth. Incidences of moderate to severe bronchopulmonary dysplasia were higher and the duration of mechanical ventilation and need for oxygen were longer in the meconium-related ileus group (P = 0.039, 0.046, 0.048, respectively). Meconium-related ileus infants took more time to start enteral feeding and the nothing per oral time was longer (P = 0.001 and 0.018, respectively). However, time to achieve full enteral feeding and Z-scores for weight and height at 37 weeks and at 6 months corrected age did not differ between the two groups.

Conclusions

Gastrografin enema in very low birth weight infants with meconium-related ileus was an effective and safe medical management. Following Gastrografin enema, very low birth weight infants with meconium-related ileus achieved similar subsequent feeding progress and similar growth levels as the control groups without meconium-related ileus.

[Evidence-based standardized nutrition protocol can shorten the time to full enteral feeding in very preterm/very low birth weight infants]

OBJECTIVES

To investigate whether evidence-based standardized nutrition protocol can facilitate the establishment of full enteral nutrition and its effect on short-term clinical outcomes in very preterm/very low birth weight infants.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was performed on the medical data of 312 preterm infants with a gestational age of ≤32 weeks or a birth weight of <1 500 g. The standardized nutrition protocol for preterm infants was implemented in May 2020; 160 infants who were treated from May 1, 2019 to April 30, 2020 were enrolled as the control group, and 152 infants who were treated from June 1, 2020 to May 31, 2021 were enrolled as the test group. The two groups were compared in terms of the time to full enteral feeding, the time to the start of enteral feeding, duration of parenteral nutrition, the time to recovery to birth weight, the duration of central venous catheterization, and the incidence rates of common complications in preterm infants.

RESULTS

Compared with the control group, the test group had significantly shorter time to full enteral feeding, time to the start of enteral feeding, duration of parenteral nutrition, and duration of central venous catheterization and a significantly lower incidence rate of catheter-related bloodstream infection (P<0.05). There were no significant differences between the two groups in the mortality rate and the incidence rate of common complications in preterm infants including grade II-III necrotizing enterocolitis (P>0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Implementation of the standardized nutrition protocol can facilitate the establishment of full enteral feeding, shorten the duration of parenteral nutrition, and reduce catheter-related bloodstream infection in very preterm/very low birth weight infants, without increasing the risk of necrotizing enterocolitis.

Delayed introduction of progressive enteral feeds to prevent necrotising enterocolitis in very low birth weight infants

BACKGROUND

Enteral feeding for very preterm or very low birth weight (VLBW) infants is often delayed for several days after birth due to concern that early introduction of feeding may not be tolerated and may increase the risk of necrotising enterocolitis. Concerns exist, however, that delaying enteral feeding may diminish the functional adaptation of the gastrointestinal tract and prolong the need for parenteral nutrition with its attendant infectious and metabolic risks.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effects of delayed introduction of progressive enteral feeds on the risk of necrotising enterocolitis, mortality and other morbidities in very preterm or VLBW infants.

SEARCH METHODS

Search strategies were developed by an information specialist in consultation with the review authors. The following databases were searched in October 2021 without date or language restrictions: CENTRAL (2021, Issue 10), MEDLINE via OVID (1946 to October 2021), Embase via OVID (1974 to October 2021), Maternity and Infant Care via OVID (1971 to October 2021), CINAHL (1982 to October 2021). We also searched for eligible trials in clinical trials databases, conference proceedings, previous reviews, and reference lists of retrieved articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials that assessed the effects of delayed (four or more days after birth) versus earlier introduction of progressive enteral feeds on necrotising enterocolitis, mortality and other morbidities in very preterm or VLBW infants.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors separately evaluated trial risk of bias, extracted data, and synthesised effect estimates using risk ratio (RR), risk difference (RD), and mean difference. We used the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of evidence for effects on necrotising enterocolitis, mortality,  feed intolerance, and invasive infection.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 14 trials in which a total of 1551 infants participated. Potential sources of bias were lack of clarity on methods to generate random sequences and conceal allocation in half of the trials, and lack of masking of caregivers or investigators in all of the trials. Trials typically defined delayed introduction of progressive enteral feeds as later than four to seven days after birth and early introduction as four days or fewer after birth. Infants in six trials (accounting for about half of all of the participants) had intrauterine growth restriction or circulatory redistribution demonstrated by absent or reversed end-diastolic flow velocities in the fetal aorta or umbilical artery.  Meta-analyses showed that delayed introduction of progressive enteral feeds may not reduce the risk of necrotising enterocolitis (RR 0.81, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.58 to 1.14; RD -0.02, 95% CI -0.04 to 0.01; 13 trials, 1507 infants; low-certainty evidence due risk of bias and imprecision) nor all-cause mortality before hospital discharge (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.36; RD -0.00, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.03; 12 trials, 1399 infants; low-certainty evidence due risk of bias and imprecision). Delayed introduction of progressive enteral feeds may slightly reduce the risk of feed intolerance (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.68 to 0.97; RD -0.09, 95% CI -0.17 to -0.02; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome = 11, 95% CI 6 to 50; 6 trials, 581 infants; low-certainty evidence due to risk of bias and imprecision) and probably increases the risk of invasive infection (RR 1.44, 95% CI 1.15 to 1.80; RD 0.10, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.15; number needed to treat for a harmful outcome = 10, 95% CI 7 to 25; 7 trials, 872 infants; moderate-certainty evidence due to risk of bias).  AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Delaying the introduction of progressive enteral feeds beyond four days after birth (compared with earlier introduction) may not reduce the risk of necrotising enterocolitis or death in very preterm or VLBW infants. Delayed introduction may slightly reduce feed intolerance, and probably increases the risk of invasive infection.

Early Total Versus Gradually Advanced Enteral Nutrition in Stable Very-Low-Birth-Weight Preterm Neonates: A Randomized, Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVE

To assess whether early total enteral nutrition (80 mL/kg/d) started on day 1 of life in hemodynamically stable preterm very-low-birth-weight (VLBW) neonates with the rapid advancement of feeds (20 mL/kg/d) help in the earlier achievement of full feeds (180 mL/kg/d).

METHODS

Early total enteral nutrition (intervention) group feeding was started with 80 mL/kg/d on the first day in all hemodynamically stable neonates admitted with birth weight of 1000-1499 grams, born at 29-33 wk of gestation as determined by first-trimester ultrasonography (USG) or expanded New Ballard Score (NBS) and was advanced by 20 mL/kg/d until maximum feeds of 180 mL/kg/d were achieved; while in control group feeding was started with 30 mL/kg/d on the first day and was advanced by 20 mL/kg/d until maximum feeds were achieved. Primary outcome measure was time taken to achieve full feeds; secondary outcomes were duration of hospital stay, necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC), time to regain birth weight, duration of antibiotics, and death.

RESULTS

Sixty VLBW neonates (1000-1499 g) with comparable baseline demographics were randomized within 24 h of admission to two groups. Early total enteral nutrition intervention group (group I, n = 31) achieved the target of full enteral nutrition at median 6 d; IQR: 0 to 7.8 d, a significantly shorter time compared to the controls (n = 29) (median 10 d; IQR: 9 to 11.0 d; p = < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Early total enteral nutrition started from the first day of life results in significantly less time to achieve full feeds in hemodynamically stable preterm and VLBW infants.

Slow advancement of enteral feed volumes to prevent necrotising enterocolitis in very low birth weight infants

BACKGROUND

Early enteral feeding practices are potentially modifiable risk factors for necrotising enterocolitis (NEC) in very preterm or very low birth weight (VLBW) infants. Observational studies suggest that conservative feeding regimens, including slowly advancing enteral feed volumes, reduce the risk of NEC. However, it is unclear whether slow feed advancement may delay establishment of full enteral feeding, and if it could be associated with infectious morbidities secondary to prolonged exposure to parenteral nutrition.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effects of slow rates of enteral feed advancement on the risk of NEC, mortality, and other morbidities in very preterm or VLBW infants.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL (2020, Issue 10), Ovid MEDLINE (1946 to October 2020), Embase via Ovid (1974 to October 2020), Maternity and Infant Care database (MIDIRS) (1971 to October 2020), CINAHL (1982 to October 2020), and clinical trials databases and reference lists of retrieved articles for eligible trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials that assessed effects of slow (up to 24 mL/kg/d) versus faster rates of advancement of enteral feed volumes on the risk of NEC in very preterm or VLBW infants.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors separately evaluated trial risk of bias, extracted data, and synthesised effect estimates using risk ratio (RR), risk difference (RD), and mean difference. We used the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of evidence. Outcomes of interest were NEC, all-cause mortality, feed intolerance, and invasive infection.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 14 trials involving a total of 4033 infants (2804 infants participated in one large trial). None of the trials masked parents, caregivers, or investigators. Risk of bias was otherwise low. Most infants were stable very preterm or VLBW infants of birth weight appropriate for gestation. About one-third of all infants were extremely preterm or extremely low birth weight (ELBW), and about one-fifth were small for gestational age, growth-restricted, or compromised as indicated by absent or reversed end-diastolic flow velocity in the foetal umbilical artery. Trials typically defined slow advancement as daily increments of 15 to 24 mL/kg, and faster advancement as daily increments of 30 to 40 mL/kg. Meta-analyses showed that slow advancement of enteral feed volumes probably has little or no effect on the risk of NEC (RR 1.06, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.83 to 1.37; RD 0.00, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.02; 14 trials, 4026 infants; moderate-certainty evidence) or all-cause mortality prior to hospital discharge (RR 1.13, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.39; RD 0.01, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.02; 13 trials, 3860 infants; moderate-certainty evidence). Meta-analyses suggested that slow advancement may slightly increase feed intolerance (RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.46; RD 0.05, 95% CI -0.02 to 0.12; 9 trials, 719 infants; low-certainty evidence) and may slightly increase the risk of invasive infection (RR 1.14, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.31; RD 0.02, 95% CI -0.00 to 0.05; 11 trials, 3583 infants; low-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The available trial data indicate that advancing enteral feed volumes slowly (daily increments up to 24 mL/kg) compared with faster rates probably does not reduce the risk of NEC, death, or feed intolerance in very preterm or VLBW infants. Advancing the volume of enteral feeds at a slow rate may slightly increase the risk of invasive infection.

Early full enteral feeding for preterm or low birth weight infants

BACKGROUND

The introduction and advancement of enteral feeds for preterm or low birth weight infants is often delayed because of concerns that early full enteral feeding will not be well tolerated or may increase the risk of necrotising enterocolitis. Early full enteral feeding, however, might increase nutrient intake and growth rates; accelerate intestinal physiological, metabolic, and microbiomic postnatal transition; and reduce the risk of complications associated with intravascular devices for fluid administration.  OBJECTIVES: To determine how early full enteral feeding, compared with delayed or progressive introduction of enteral feeds, affects growth and adverse events such as necrotising enterocolitis, in preterm or low birth weight infants.

SEARCH METHODS

We used the standard search strategy of Cochrane Neonatal to search Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials; MEDLINE Ovid, Embase Ovid, Maternity & Infant Care Database Ovid, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and clinical trials databases, conference proceedings, and the reference lists of retrieved articles for randomised controlled trials and quasi-randomised trials to October 2020.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials that compared early full enteral feeding with delayed or progressive introduction of enteral feeds in preterm or low birth weight infants.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used the standard methods of Cochrane Neonatal. Two review authors separately assessed trial eligibility, evaluated trial quality, extracted data, and synthesised effect estimates using risk ratios (RR), risk differences, and mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). We used the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included six trials. All were undertaken in the 2010s in neonatal care facilities in India. In total, 526 infants participated. Most were very preterm infants of birth weight between 1000 g and 1500 g. Trials were of good methodological quality, but a potential source of bias was that parents, clinicians, and investigators were not masked. The trials compared early full feeding (60 mL/kg to 80 mL/kg on day one after birth) with minimal enteral feeding (typically 20 mL/kg on day one) supplemented with intravenous fluids. Feed volumes were advanced daily as tolerated by 20 mL/kg to 30 mL/kg body weight to a target steady-state volume of 150 mL/kg to 180 mL/kg/day. All participating infants were fed preferentially with maternal expressed breast milk, with two trials supplementing insufficient volumes with donor breast milk and four supplementing with preterm formula.  Few data were available to assess growth parameters. One trial (64 participants) reported a slower rate of weight gain (median difference -3.0 g/kg/day), and another (180 participants) reported a faster rate of weight gain in the early full enteral feeding group (MD 1.2 g/kg/day). We did not meta-analyse these data (very low-certainty evidence). None of the trials reported rate of head circumference growth. One trial reported that the mean z-score for weight at hospital discharge was higher in the early full enteral feeding group (MD 0.24, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.42; low-certainty evidence). Meta-analyses showed no evidence of an effect on necrotising enterocolitis (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.38 to 2.54; 6 trials, 522 participants; I² = 51%; very low-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Trials provided insufficient data to determine with any certainty how early full enteral feeding, compared with delayed or progressive introduction of enteral feeds, affects growth in preterm or low birth weight infants. We are uncertain whether early full enteral feeding affects the risk of necrotising enterocolitis because of the risk of bias in the trials (due to lack of masking), inconsistency, and imprecision.

Early full enteral feeding for preterm or low birth weight infants

This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (Intervention). The objectives are as follows:

We aim to assess the benefits and harms of early full enteral nutrition versus progressive introduction of enteral feeds in preterm or low birth weight (LBW) infants.

Where data are available, we will undertake subgroup analyses of very preterm or very low birth weight (VLBW) infants (versus infants born after a longer gestation or with higher birth weight), infants who are 'small for gestational age' at birth (versus those deemed 'appropriate for gestation'), infants fed with human milk only (versus formula‐fed infants), and trials set in low‐ or middle‐income countries (versus high‐income countries).

Survey of a nutrition management method for very low birthweight infants: Status before wide use of breast milk banks in Japan

BACKGROUND

The importance of breast-feeding for very low birthweight (VLBW) infants has been pointed out. Some overseas studies suggested that the standardization of enteral nutrition (EN) leads to improved prognosis in VLBW infants. In Japan, however, physicians in charge of infants are responsible for making nutrition management decisions on an individual basis. We conducted an online survey to clarify the course of nutrition management of VLBW infants currently implemented in Japan.

METHODS

We mailed a notice to 300 representative neonatologists throughout Japan requesting their participation in the online survey. On the survey website, neonatologists responded to questions regarding the nutritional strategy for five birthweight groups (less than 500 g, 500-749 g, 750-999 g, 1,000-1,249 g and 1,250-1,499 g).

RESULTS

Responses were recieved from 137 neonatologists. The first choice for EN up to 1 week after birth was breast milk regardless of birthweight (92.0% for 1,250-1,499 g to 95.6% for 500-999 g). More than 30% of the respondents answered that they fast infants who weigh <750 g at birth or feed them with other mothers' breast milk until their own mother's milk becomes available. The lower the birthweight, the later EN is started, and the greater the number of days to establish EN.

CONCLUSION

The lower the birthweight, the more difficult it is to feed infants their own mother's milk and the later the EN is started. If donor milk is supplied in a stable manner, it takes fewer days to establish EN.

Early enteral feeding in preterm infants

Early enteral feeding is a potentially modifiable risk factor for necrotising enterocolitis (NEC) and late onset sepsis (LOS), however enteral feeding practices for preterm infants are highly variable. High-quality evidence is increasingly available to guide early feeding in preterm infants. Meta-analyses of randomised trials indicate that early trophic feeding within 48 h after birth and introduction of progressive enteral feeding before 4 days of life at an advancement rate above 24 ml/kg/day can be achieved in clinically stable very preterm and very low birthweight (VLBW) infants, without higher mortality or incidence of NEC. This finding may not be generalisable to high risk infants such as those born small for gestational age (SGA) or following absent/reversed end diastolic flow velocity (AREDFV) detected antenatally on placental Doppler studies, due to the small number of such infants in existing trials. Trials targeting such high-risk preterm infants have demonstrated that progressive enteral feeding started in the first 4 days is safe and does not lead to higher NEC or mortality; however, there is a paucity of data to guide feeding advancement in such infants. There is little trial evidence to support bolus or continuous gavage feeding as being superior in clinically stable preterm infants. Trials that examine enteral feeding are commonly unblinded for technical and practical reasons, which increases the risk of bias in such trials, specifically when considering potentially subjective outcome such as NEC and LOS; future clinical trials should focus on objective, primary outcome measures such as all-cause mortality, long term growth and neurodevelopment. Alternatively, important short-term outcomes such as NEC could be used with blinded assessment.

Probiotics for preterm infants - time to end all controversies

Mortality, necrotising enterocolitis (NEC), late onset sepsis (LOS) and feeding intolerance are significant issues for very preterm (< 32 weeks) and extremely preterm (< 28 weeks) infants. The complications of ≥ Stage II NEC [e.g. Resection of the gangrenous gut, survival with intestinal failure, recurrent infections, prolonged hospital stay, and long-term neurodevelopmental impairment (NDI)] impose a significant health burden. LOS also carries significant burden including long-term NDI due to adverse effects of inflammation on the preterm brain during the critical phase of development. Frequent stopping of feeds due to feeding intolerance is a significant iatrogenic contributor to postnatal growth failure in extremely preterm infants. Over 25 systematic reviews and meta-analyses of RCTs (~12 000 participants) have reported that probiotics significantly reduce the risk of all-cause mortality, NEC ≥ Stage II, LOS and feeding intolerance in preterm infants. Systematic reviews and meta-analysis of non-RCTs have also shown that the benefits after adopting probiotics as a standard prophylaxis for preterm infants are similar to those reported in RCTs. No intervention comes close to probiotics when it comes to significant reduction in death, NEC, LOS and feeding intolerance at a cost of less than a dollar a day irrespective of the setting and baseline incidence of NEC. The common controversies that are preventing the rapid uptake of probiotics for preterm infants are addressed in this paper.

Immunonutrition for Preterm Infants

Care and outcomes for very preterm infants continue to improve, but important causes of mortality and acute and long-term morbidity associated with prolonged hospitalisation remain. Necrotising enterocolitis (NEC) and late-onset infection have emerged as the major causes of death beyond the early neonatal period and of neurodisability in very preterm infants. Although the pathogenesis of these conditions is incompletely understood, it appears to be related to the content and mode of delivery of the enteral diet, particularly the impact of immunonutrients from human breast milk on the microbial and metabolic balance within the immature intestine. Evidence exists to support investment in measures to help mothers to express breast milk as the primary source of nutrition for their very preterm infants. In the absence of maternal milk, pasteurised donor breast milk provides protection against NEC, but its nutritive adequacy is not clear and its cost-effectiveness is uncertain. Supplementation with individual immunonutrients, including immunoglobulins and lactoferrin, has not been shown to be effective in preventing NEC or infection in randomised controlled trials. The evidence base for prebiotics and probiotics is stronger, but concerns exist about the choice, safety and availability of formulations. Other strategies - including avoidance of drugs such as gastric acid suppressants that compromise innate immunity, as well as evidence-based progressive feeding strategies that reduce exposure to invasive interventions - are emerging as key components of care packages to reduce the burden of NEC, infection and associated growth and developmental faltering for very preterm infants.

Slow advancement of enteral feed volumes to prevent necrotising enterocolitis in very low birth weight infants

BACKGROUND

Early enteral feeding practices are potentially modifiable risk factors for necrotising enterocolitis (NEC) in very preterm or very low birth weight (VLBW) infants. Observational studies suggest that conservative feeding regimens, including slowly advancing enteral feed volumes, reduce the risk of NEC. However, slow feed advancement may delay establishment of full enteral feeding and may be associated with metabolic and infectious morbidities secondary to prolonged exposure to parenteral nutrition.

OBJECTIVES

To determine effects of slow rates of enteral feed advancement on the incidence of NEC, mortality, and other morbidities in very preterm or VLBW infants.

SEARCH METHODS

We used the standard Cochrane Neonatal search strategy to search the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2017, Issue 5), MEDLINE via PubMed (1966 to June 2017), Embase (1980 to June 2017), and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL; 1982 to June 2017). We searched clinical trials databases, conference proceedings, previous reviews, and reference lists of retrieved articles for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-randomised trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials that assessed effects of slow (up to 24 mL/kg/d) versus faster rates of advancement of enteral feed volumes upon the incidence of NEC in very preterm or VLBW infants.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors assessed trial eligibility and risk of bias and independently extracted data. We analysed treatment effects in individual trials and reported risk ratio (RR) and risk difference (RD) for dichotomous data, and mean difference (MD) for continuous data, with respective 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We used a fixed-effect model for meta-analyses and explored potential causes of heterogeneity via sensitivity analyses. We assessed the quality of evidence at the outcome level using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 10 RCTs in which a total of 3753 infants participated (2804 infants participated in one large trial). Most participants were stable very preterm infants of birth weight appropriate for gestation. About one-third of all participants were extremely preterm or extremely low birth weight (ELBW), and about one-fifth were small for gestational age (SGA), growth-restricted, or compromised in utero, as indicated by absent or reversed end-diastolic flow velocity (AREDFV) in the fetal umbilical artery. Trials typically defined slow advancement as daily increments of 15 to 20 mL/kg, and faster advancement as daily increments of 30 to 40 mL/kg. Trials generally were of good methodological quality, although none was blinded.Meta-analyses did not show effects on risk of NEC (typical RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.39; RD 0.0, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.02) or all-cause mortality (typical RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.42; typical RD 0.01, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.03). Subgroup analyses of extremely preterm or ELBW infants, or of SGA or growth-restricted or growth-compromised infants, showed no evidence of an effect on risk of NEC or death. Slow feed advancement delayed establishment of full enteral nutrition by between about one and five days. Meta-analysis showed borderline increased risk of invasive infection (typical RR 1.15, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.32; typical RD 0.03, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.05). The GRADE quality of evidence for primary outcomes was "moderate", downgraded from "high" because of lack of blinding in the included trials.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Available trial data do not provide evidence that advancing enteral feed volumes at daily increments of 15 to 20 mL/kg (compared with 30 to 40 mL/kg) reduces the risk of NEC or death in very preterm or VLBW infants, extremely preterm or ELBW infants, SGA or growth-restricted infants, or infants with antenatal AREDFV. Advancing the volume of enteral feeds at a slow rate results in several days of delay in establishing full enteral feeds and may increase the risk of invasive infection.

Benefits of Bifidobacterium breve M-16V Supplementation in Preterm Neonates - A Retrospective Cohort Study

Background

Systematic reviews of randomised controlled trials report that probiotics reduce the risk of necrotising enterocolitis (NEC) in preterm neonates.

Aim

To determine whether routine probiotic supplementation (RPS) to preterm neonates would reduce the incidence of NEC.

Methods

The incidence of NEC ≥ Stage II and all-cause mortality was compared for an equal period of 24 months ‘before’ (Epoch 1) and ‘after’ (Epoch 2) RPS with Bifidobacterium breve M-16V in neonates <34 weeks. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was conducted to adjust for relevant confounders.

Results

A total of 1755 neonates (Epoch I vs. II: 835 vs. 920) with comparable gestation and birth weights were admitted. There was a significant reduction in NEC ≥ Stage II: 3% vs. 1%, adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 0.43 (95%CI: 0.21–0.87); ‘NEC ≥ Stage II or all-cause mortality’: 9% vs. 5%, aOR = 0.53 (95%CI: 0.32–0.88); but not all-cause mortality alone: 7% vs. 4%, aOR = 0.58 (95% CI: 0.31–1.06) in Epoch II. The benefits in neonates <28 weeks did not reach statistical significance: NEC ≥ Stage II: 6% vs. 3%, aOR 0.51 (95%CI: 0.20–1.27), ‘NEC ≥ Stage II or all-cause mortality’, 21% vs. 14%, aOR = 0.59 (95%CI: 0.29–1.18); all-cause mortality: 17% vs. 11%, aOR = 0.63 (95%CI: 0.28–1.41). There was no probiotic sepsis.

Conclusion

RPS with Bifidobacterium breve M-16V was associated with decreased NEC≥ Stage II and ‘NEC≥ Stage II or all-cause mortality’ in neonates <34 weeks. Large sample size is required to assess the potential benefits of RPS in neonates <28 weeks.

Slow advancement of enteral feed volumes to prevent necrotising enterocolitis in very low birth weight infants

BACKGROUND

Early enteral feeding practices are potentially modifiable risk factors for necrotising enterocolitis (NEC) in very preterm or very low birth weight (VLBW) infants. Observational studies suggest that conservative feeding regimens, including slowly advancing enteral feed volumes, reduce the risk of NEC. However, slow feed advancement may delay establishment of full enteral feeding and be associated with metabolic and infectious morbidities secondary to prolonged exposure to parenteral nutrition.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effect of slow rates of enteral feed advancement on the incidence of NEC, mortality, and other morbidities in very preterm or VLBW infants.

SEARCH METHODS

We used the standard search strategy of the Cochrane Neonatal Review group to search the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2015, Issue 7), MEDLINE via PubMed (1966 to August 2015), EMBASE (1980 to August 2015), and CINAHL (1982 to August 2015). We also searched clinical trials databases, conference proceedings, previous reviews, and the reference lists of retrieved articles for randomised controlled trials and quasi-randomised trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials that assessed the effect of slow (up to 24 mL/kg/day) versus faster rates of advancement of enteral feed volumes upon the incidence of NEC in very preterm or VLBW infants.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trial eligibility and risk of bias and undertook data extraction. We analysed the treatment effects in the individual trials and reported the risk ratio (RR) and risk difference (RD) for dichotomous data and mean difference for continuous data, with respective 95% confidence intervals (CI). We used a fixed-effect model in meta-analyses and explored the potential causes of heterogeneity in sensitivity analyses.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified nine randomised controlled trials in which 949 infants participated. Most participants were stable preterm infants with birth weights between 1000 and 1500 g. Fewer participants were extremely preterm, extremely low birth weight, or growth-restricted. The trials typically defined slow advancement as daily increments of 15 to 24 mL/kg and faster advancement as 30 to 40 mL/kg. Meta-analyses did not show statistically significant effects on the risk of NEC (typical RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.62; typical RD -0.00, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.03) or all-cause mortality (typical RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.53; typical RD 0.03, 95% CI -0.02 to 0.08). Slow feeds advancement delayed the establishment of full enteral nutrition by one to five days and increased the risk of invasive infection (typical RR 1.46, 95% CI 1.03 to 2.06; typical RD 0.07, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.13; number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome 14, 95% CI 8 to 100).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The available trial data suggest that advancing enteral feed volumes at daily increments of 30 to 40 mL/kg (compared to 15 to 24 mL/kg) does not increase the risk of NEC or death in VLBW infants. Advancing the volume of enteral feeds at slow rates results in several days of delay in establishing full enteral feeds and increases the risk of invasive infection. The applicability of these findings to extremely preterm, extremely low birth weight, or growth-restricted infants is limited. Further randomised controlled trials in these populations may be warranted to resolve this uncertainty.

The value of routine evaluation of gastric residuals in very low birth weight infants

OBJECTIVE

Little information exists regarding gastric residual (GR) evaluation prior to feedings in premature infants. The purpose of this study was to compare the amount of feedings at 2 and 3 weeks of age, number of days to full feedings, growth and incidence of complications between infants who underwent RGR (routine evaluation of GR) evaluation versus those who did not.

STUDY DESIGN

Sixty-one premature infants were randomized to one of two groups. Group 1 received RGR evaluation prior to feeds and Group 2 did not.

RESULT

There was no difference in amount of feeding at 2 (P=0.66) or 3 (P=0.41) weeks of age, growth, days on parenteral nutrition or complications. Although not statistically significant, infants without RGR evaluation reached feeds of 150 ml kg(-1) per day 6 days earlier and had 6 fewer days with central venous access.

CONCLUSION

RESULTs suggest RGR evaluation may not improve nutritional outcomes in premature infants.

Delayed introduction of progressive enteral feeds to prevent necrotising enterocolitis in very low birth weight infants

BACKGROUND

The introduction of enteral feeds for very preterm (less than 32 weeks' gestation) or very low birth weight (VLBW; less than 1500 g) infants is often delayed for several days or longer after birth due to concern that early introduction may not be tolerated and may increase the risk of necrotising enterocolitis (NEC). However, delaying enteral feeding could diminish the functional adaptation of the gastrointestinal tract and prolong the need for parenteral nutrition with its attendant infectious and metabolic risks.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effect of delayed introduction of progressive enteral feeds on the incidence of NEC, mortality and other morbidities in very preterm or VLBW infants.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, 2014, Issue 8), MEDLINE (1966 to September 2014), EMBASE (1980 to September 2014), CINAHL (1982 to September 2014), conference proceedings and previous reviews.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials that assessed the effect of delayed (more than four days after birth) versus earlier introduction of progressive enteral feeds on the incidence of NEC, mortality and other morbidities in very preterm or VLBW infants.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trial eligibility and risk of bias and undertook data extraction. We analysed the treatment effects in the individual trials and reported the risk ratio (RR) and risk difference for dichotomous data and mean difference for continuous data, with respective 95% confidence intervals (CI). We used a fixed-effect model in meta-analyses and explored the potential causes of heterogeneity in sensitivity analyses.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified nine randomised controlled trials in which 1106 infants participated. Few participants were extremely preterm (less 28 weeks' gestation) or extremely low birth weight (less than 1000 g). The trials defined delayed introduction of progressive enteral feeds as later than four to seven days after birth and early introduction as four days or less after birth. Meta-analyses did not detect statistically significant effects on the risk of NEC (typical RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.34; 8 trials; 1092 infants) or all-cause mortality (typical RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.88; 7 trials; 967 infants). Four of the trials restricted participation to growth-restricted infants with Doppler ultrasound evidence of abnormal fetal circulatory distribution or flow. Planned subgroup analyses of these trials found no statistically significant effects on the risk of NEC or all-cause mortality. Infants who had delayed introduction of enteral feeds took longer to establish full enteral feeding (reported median differences two to four days).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The evidence available from randomised controlled trials suggested that delaying the introduction of progressive enteral feeds beyond four days after birth did not reduce the risk of developing NEC in very preterm or VLBW infants, including growth-restricted infants. Delaying the introduction of progressive enteral feeds resulted in a few days' delay in establishing full enteral feeds but the clinical importance of this effect was unclear. The applicability of these findings to extremely preterm or extremely low birth weight was uncertain. Further randomised controlled trials in this population may be warranted.

Standardized Slow Enteral Feeding Protocol and the Incidence of Necrotizing Enterocolitis in Extremely Low Birth Weight Infants

BACKGROUND

Compared with early enteral feeds, the delayed introduction and slow advancement of enteral feedings to reduce the incidence of necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC) are not well studied in extremely low birth weight (ELBW) infants.

OBJECTIVE

To study the effects of a standardized slow enteral feeding (SSEF) protocol in ELBW infants.

METHODS

ELBW infants who followed an SSEF protocol (September 2009 to December 2012) were compared with a similar group of historical controls (January 2003 to July 2009). Short-term outcomes between the 2 groups were compared by propensity score (PS) analysis.

RESULTS

One hundred twenty-five infants in the SSEF group were compared with 294 historical controls. Compared with the controls, feeding initiation day, full enteral feeding day, parenteral nutrition (PN) days, and total central line days were longer in the SSEF group. There was no significant difference in overall NEC (5.6% vs 11.2%, respectively; P = .10) or surgical NEC (1.6% vs 4.8%, respectively; P = .17) between the SSEF group and controls. However, in infants with birth weight <750 g, NEC (2.1% vs 16.2%, respectively; P < .01) or combined NEC/death (12.8% vs 29.5%, respectively; P = .03) was significantly less in the SSEF group compared with controls. In infants who survived to discharge, there was no significant difference in the discharge weight or length of stay in PS-adjusted analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

An SSEF protocol significantly reduces the incidence of NEC and combined NEC/death in infants with birth weight <750 g. Despite taking longer to achieve full enteral feeding on this protocol, surviving ELBW infants demonstrated comparable weight gain at discharge without prolonging their hospital stay.

Slow advancement of enteral feed volumes to prevent necrotising enterocolitis in very low birth weight infants

BACKGROUND

Early enteral feeding practices are potentially modifiable risk factors for necrotising enterocolitis in very preterm or very low birth weight (VLBW) infants. Observational studies suggest that conservative feeding regimens, including slowly advancing enteral feed volumes, reduce the risk of necrotising enterocolitis. However, slow feed advancement may delay establishment of full enteral feeding and be associated with metabolic and infectious morbidities secondary to prolonged exposure to parenteral nutrition.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effect of slow rates of enteral feed advancement on the incidence of necrotising enterocolitis, mortality, and other morbidities in very preterm or VLBW infants.

SEARCH METHODS

We used the standard search strategy of the Cochrane Neonatal Review Group Specialised Register. We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2014, Issue 8), MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL (to September 2014), conference proceedings, and previous reviews.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials that assessed the effect of slow (up to 24 ml/kg per day) versus faster rates of advancement of enteral feed volumes upon the incidence of necrotising enterocolitis in very preterm or VLBW infants.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trial eligibility and risk of bias and undertook data extraction. We analysed the treatment effects in the individual trials and reported the risk ratio and risk difference for dichotomous data and mean difference for continuous data, with respective 95% confidence intervals. We used a fixed-effect model in meta-analyses and explored the potential causes of heterogeneity in sensitivity analyses.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified six randomised controlled trials in which a total of 618 infants participated. Most participants were stable preterm infants of birth weight between 1000 g and 1500 g. Few participants were extremely preterm, extremely low birth weight, or growth-restricted. The trials typically defined slow advancement as daily increments of 15 ml/kg to 20 ml/kg and faster advancement as 30 ml/kg to 35 ml/kg. Meta-analyses did not detect statistically significant effects on the risk of necrotising enterocolitis (typical risk ratio (RR) 0.96, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.55 to 1.70) or all-cause mortality (typical RR 1.57, 95% CI 0.92 to 2.70). Infants who had slow advancement took significantly longer to regain birth weight (reported median differences 2 to 6 days) and to establish full enteral feeding (1 to 5 days).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The available trial data suggest that advancing enteral feed volumes at daily increments of 30 ml/kg to 35 ml/kg does not increase the risk of necrotising enterocolitis in very preterm or VLBW infants. Advancing the volume of enteral feeds at slow rates resulted in several days delay in regaining birth weight and establishing full enteral feeds. The applicability of these findings to extremely preterm, extremely low birth weight, or growth-restricted infants is limited. Further randomised controlled trials in these populations may be warranted to resolve this uncertainty.

Delayed introduction of progressive enteral feeds to prevent necrotising enterocolitis in very low birth weight infants

BACKGROUND

The introduction of enteral feeds for very preterm (< 32 weeks) or very low birth weight (< 1500 g) infants is often delayed for several days or longer after birth due to concern that early introduction may not be tolerated and may increase the risk of necrotising enterocolitis (NEC). However, delaying enteral feeding could diminish the functional adaptation of the gastrointestinal tract and prolong the need for parenteral nutrition with its attendant infectious and metabolic risks.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effect of delayed introduction of progressive enteral feeds on the incidence of necrotising enterocolitis, mortality and other morbidities in very preterm or very low birth weight infants.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, The Cochrane Library, 2013, Issue 3), MEDLINE (1966 to April 2013), EMBASE (1980 to April 2013), CINAHL (1982 to April 2013), conference proceedings, and previous reviews.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials that assessed the effect of delayed (more than four days after birth) versus earlier introduction of progressive enteral feeds on the incidence of NEC, mortality and other morbidities in very preterm or very low birth weight infants.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We extracted data using the standard methods of the Cochrane Neonatal Review Group, with separate evaluation of trial quality and data extraction by two review authors.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified seven randomised controlled trials in which a total of 964 infants participated. Few participants were extremely preterm (< 28 weeks) or extremely low birth weight (< 1000 g). The trials defined delayed introduction as later than five to seven days after birth and early introduction as less than four days after birth. Meta-analyses did not detect statistically significant effects on the risk of NEC (typical risk ratio (RR) 0.92 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.64 to 1.34) or all-cause mortality (typical RR 1.26 (95% CI 0.78 to 2.01)). Three of the trials restricted participation to growth-restricted infants with Doppler ultrasound evidence of abnormal fetal circulatory distribution or flow. Planned subgroup analyses of these trials did not find any statistically significant effects on the risk of NEC or all-cause mortality. Infants who had delayed introduction of enteral feeds took longer to establish full enteral feeding (reported median difference two to four days).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The evidence available from randomised controlled trials suggests that delaying the introduction of progressive enteral feeds beyond four days after birth does not affect the risk of developing NEC in very preterm or very low birth weight infants, including growth-restricted infants. Delaying the introduction of progressive enteral feeds results in a few days delay in establishing full enteral feeds but the clinical importance of this effect is unclear. The applicability of these findings to extremely preterm or extremely low birth weight is uncertain. Further randomised controlled trials in this population may be warranted.

Slow advancement of enteral feed volumes to prevent necrotising enterocolitis in very low birth weight infants

BACKGROUND

Early enteral feeding practices are potentially modifiable risk factors for necrotising enterocolitis in very preterm or very low birth weight (VLBW) infants. Observational studies suggest that conservative feeding regimens that include slowly advancing enteral feed volumes reduce the risk of necrotising enterocolitis. However, slow feed advancement may delay establishment of full enteral feeding and be associated with metabolic and infectious morbidities secondary to prolonged exposure to parenteral nutrition.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effect of slow rates of enteral feed advancement on the incidence of necrotising enterocolitis, mortality and other morbidities in very preterm or VLBW infants.

SEARCH METHODS

We used the standard search strategy of the Cochrane Neonatal Review Group. We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2012, Issue 12), MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL (to December 2012), conference proceedings, and previous reviews.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials that assessed the effect of slow (up to 24 ml/kg/day) versus faster rates of advancement of enteral feed volumes upon the incidence of necrotising enterocolitis in very preterm or VLBW infants.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data collection and analysis was performed using the standard methods of the Cochrane Neonatal Review Group.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified five randomised controlled trials in which a total of 588 infants participated. Few participants were extremely preterm, extremely low birth weight or growth restricted. The trials defined slow advancement as daily increments of 15 to 20 ml/kg and faster advancement as 30 to 35 ml/kg. Meta-analyses did not detect statistically significant effects on the risk of necrotising enterocolitis (typical risk ratio (RR) 0.97, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.54 to 1.74) or all-cause mortality (RR 1.41, 95% CI 0.81 to 2.74). Infants who had slow advancement took significantly longer to regain birth weight (reported median differences two to six days) and to establish full enteral feeding (two to five days).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The available trial data suggest that advancing enteral feed volumes at slow rather than faster rates does not reduce the risk of necrotising enterocolitis in very preterm or VLBW infants. Advancing the volume of enteral feeds at slow rates results in several days delay in regaining birth weight and establishing full enteral feeds but the long term clinical importance of these effects is unclear. The applicability of these findings to extremely preterm, extremely low birth weight or growth restricted infants is limited. Further randomised controlled trials in these populations may be warranted to resolve this uncertainty.

Early trophic feeding versus enteral fasting for very preterm or very low birth weight infants

BACKGROUND

The introduction of enteral feeds for very preterm (< 32 weeks) or very low birth weight (< 1500 grams) infants is often delayed due to concern that early introduction may not be tolerated and may increase the risk of necrotising enterocolitis. However, prolonged enteral fasting may diminish the functional adaptation of the immature gastrointestinal tract and extend the need for parenteral nutrition with its attendant infectious and metabolic risks. Trophic feeding, giving infants very small volumes of milk to promote intestinal maturation, may enhance feeding tolerance and decrease the time taken to reach full enteral feeding independently of parenteral nutrition.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effect of early trophic feeding versus enteral fasting on feed tolerance, growth and development, and the incidence of neonatal morbidity (including necrotising enterocolitis and invasive infection) and mortality in very preterm or VLBW infants.

SEARCH METHODS

We used the standard search strategy of the Cochrane Neonatal Review Group. This included electronic searches of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2012, Issue 12), MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL (1980 until December 2012), conference proceedings and previous reviews.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials that assessed the effects of early trophic feeding (milk volumes up to 24 ml/kg/day introduced before 96 hours postnatal age and continued until at least one week after birth) versus a comparable period of enteral fasting in very preterm or very low birth weight infants.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We extracted data using the standard methods of the Cochrane Neonatal Review Group with separate evaluation of trial quality and data extraction by two authors and synthesis of data using risk ratio, risk difference and mean difference.

MAIN RESULTS

Nine trials in which a total of 754 very preterm or very low birth weight infants participated were eligible for inclusion. Few participants were extremely preterm (< 28 weeks) or extremely low birth weight (< 1000 grams) or growth restricted. These trials did not provide any evidence that early trophic feeding affected feed tolerance or growth rates. Meta-analysis did not detect a statistically significant effect on the incidence of necrotising enterocolitis: typical risk ratio 1.07 (95% confidence interval 0.67 to 1.70); risk difference 0.01 (-0.03 to 0.05).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The available trial data do not provide evidence of important beneficial or harmful effects of early trophic feeding for very preterm or very low birth weight infants. The applicability of these findings to extremely preterm, extremely low birth weight or growth restricted infants is limited. Further randomised controlled trials would be needed to determine how trophic feeding compared with enteral fasting affects important outcomes in this population.

Enteral feeding practices in the NICU: results from a 2009 Neonatal Enteral Feeding Survey

PURPOSE

: The purpose of this study was to examine the current management of the enteral feeding regimens of premature infants cared for in the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU).

SUBJECTS

: The study included responses from 70 neonatal nurses who participated in a 2009 Neonatal Enteral Feeding Survey distributed electronically to the National Association of Neonatal Nurses membership. These respondents were representative of both the United States and Canada, with 29 US states represented. The majority of respondents (95.7%) reported current nursing employment in a level III NICU.

DESIGN

: Survey research was used in this exploratory study. The survey, Enteral Tube Feeding Practices in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit, was developed in collaboration with expert neonatal nurses and nutritionists, pilot tested, and distributed via electronic means.

METHODS

: Survey research was conducted according to the Dillman methodology. Data analysis included descriptive statistics and univariate analysis of variance assessing for significant differences in specific neonatal feeding practices reported. Thematic analysis was used to analyze the qualitative data reported.

OUTCOME MEASURES

: The outcome measures included the survey responses to the questions asked about the implementation of an enteral feeding protocol and various aspects of enteral feeding practices in the NICU.

RESULTS

: The majority of participants (60.9%) reported that an enteral feeding protocol was implemented in practice, but that it was inconsistently followed because of individual physician or nurse practice patterns, or highly individualized feeding plans required of specific clinical care needs of the patient. Respondents indicated that gestational age was the leading criteria used to initiate feedings, and patent ductus arteriosis treatment was the primary contraindication to enteral feedings. The leading factor reported to delay or alter enteral feedings was the presence of gastric residuals. Survey data indicated that other contraindicating factors to enteral feeding are variable across NICUs and, as reported, are often inconsistent with the current research published to date.

CONCLUSIONS

: Research is needed to provide a foundation on which to develop effective enteral feeding protocols that are appropriate for the diversity of infants cared for in the NICU. Such research findings will culminate in the development and implementation of enteral feeding protocols in the NICU, which will result in improved nutrition, growth, and development outcomes for premature infants.

Pathogenesis and prevention of necrotizing enterocolitis

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC) remains the most common serious acquired gastrointestinal disorder affecting preterm infants. Here we review recent advances in our understanding of the pathogenesis of this multifactorial condition and consider the implications for practice and research.

RECENT FINDINGS

NEC is an important cause of mortality and serious morbidity in preterm infants. The risk is inversely proportional to gestational age and weight at birth. Fetal growth restriction and compromise may be additional specific risk factors. NEC, particularly severe NEC requiring surgical intervention and NEC with invasive infection, is associated with acute morbidity and mortality and adverse neurodevelopmental outcomes. The principal modifiable postnatal risk factors for NEC in preterm infants relate to enteral feeding practices including formula milk feeding, early and rapid advancement of enteral feed volumes, and exposure to H2-receptor antagonists.

SUMMARY

Our understanding of the pathogenesis of this condition remains incomplete. With the exception of feeding with human milk, only limited evidence is currently available to support interventions to prevent NEC. Promising strategies that merit further evaluation in randomized controlled trials include the use of prebiotics and probiotics and the avoidance of exposure to H2-receptor antagonists.

Improved outcomes with a standardized feeding protocol for very low birth weight infants

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of a standardized enteral feeding protocol for very low birth weight (VLBW) infants on nutritional, clinical and growth outcomes.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective analysis of VLBW cohorts 9 months before and after initiation of a standardized feeding protocol consisting of 6-8 days of trophic feedings, followed by an increase of 20 ml/kg/day. The primary outcome was days to reach full enteral feeds defined as 160 ml/kg/day. Secondary outcomes included rates of necrotizing enterocolitis and culture-proven sepsis, days of parenteral nutrition and growth end points.

RESULT

Data were analyzed on 147 VLBW infants who received enteral feedings, 83 before ('Before') and 64 subsequent to ('After') feeding protocol initiation. Extremely low birth weight (ELBW) infants in the After group attained enteral volumes of 120 ml/kg/day (43.9 days Before vs 32.8 days After, P=0.02) and 160 ml/kg/day (48.5 days Before vs 35.8 days After, P=0.02) significantly faster and received significantly fewer days of parenteral nutrition (46.2 days Before vs 31.3 days After, P=0.01). Necrotizing enterocolitis decreased in the After group among VLBW (15/83, 18% Before vs 2/64, 3% After, P=0.005) and ELBW infants (11/31, 35% Before vs 2/26, 8% After, P=0.01). Late-onset sepsis decreased significantly in the After group (26/83, 31% Before vs 6/64, 9% After, P=0.001). Excluding those with weight <3rd percentile at birth, the proportion with weight <3rd percentile at discharge decreased significantly after protocol initiation (35% Before vs 17% After, P=0.03).

CONCLUSION

These data suggest that implementation of a standardized feeding protocol for VLBW infants results in earlier successful enteral feeding without increased rates of major morbidities.

Delayed introduction of progressive enteral feeds to prevent necrotising enterocolitis in very low birth weight infants

BACKGROUND

The introduction of progressive enteral feeds for very low birth weight (VLBW) infants is often delayed for several days or longer after birth due to concern that earlier introduction may not be tolerated and may increase the risk of necrotising enterocolitis (NEC). However, delaying enteral feeding could diminish the functional adaptation of the gastrointestinal tract and prolong the need for parenteral nutrition with its attendant infectious and metabolic risks.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effect of delayed introduction of progressive enteral feeds on the incidence of NEC, mortality and other morbidities in VLBW infants.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, The Cochrane Library, 2010, Issue 4), MEDLINE (1966 to December 2010), EMBASE (1980 to December 2010), CINAHL (1982 to December 2010), conference proceedings, and previous reviews.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials that assessed the effect of delayed (more than four days' postnatal age) versus earlier introduction of progressive enteral feeds on the incidence of NEC, mortality and other morbidities in VLBW infants.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data collection and analysis were performed in accordance with the standard methods of the Cochrane Neonatal Review Group.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified five randomised controlled trials (RCT) in which a total of 600 infants participated. The trials defined delayed introduction as later than five to seven days after birth and early introduction as less than four days after birth. Two of the trials, in which a total of 488 infants participated, only recruited growth-restricted infants with Doppler ultrasound evidence of abnormal fetal circulatory distribution or flow. Meta-analyses did not detect statistically significant effects on the risk of NEC [typical relative risk 0.89, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.58 to 1.37] or all cause mortality (typical relative risk 0.93, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.64). Infants who had delayed introduction of enteral feeds took significantly longer to establish full enteral feeding (reported median difference three days).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Current trial data do not provide evidence that delayed introduction of progressive enteral feeds reduces the risk of NEC in VLBW infants. Delaying the introducing of progressive enteral feeds results in several days delay in establishing full enteral feeds but the clinical importance of this effect is unclear. Further RCTs are needed to give more precise estimates of the effect of delaying the introduction of enteral feeds on clinical outcomes in VLBW infants.

Slow advancement of enteral feed volumes to prevent necrotising enterocolitis in very low birth weight infants

BACKGROUND

The major modifiable risk factors for necrotising enterocolitis (NEC) in very low birth weight (VLBW) infants relate to enteral feeding practices. Observational studies suggest that conservative feeding regimens that include slowly advancing enteral feed volumes reduce the risk of NEC. However, slow feed advancement may delay establishment of full enteral feeding and so be associated with metabolic and infectious morbidities secondary to prolonged exposure to parenteral nutrition.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effect of slow rates of enteral feed advancement on the incidence of NEC, mortality and other morbidities in VLBW infants.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We used the standard search strategy of the Cochrane Neonatal Group. We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, The Cochrane Library, 2010, Issue 4), MEDLINE (1966 to December 2010), EMBASE (1980 to December 2010), CINAHL (1982 to December 2010), conference proceedings, and previous reviews.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials that assessed the effect of slow (up to 24 ml/kg/day) versus faster rates of advancement of enteral feed volumes upon the incidence of NEC in VLBW infants.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data collection and analysis was performed in accordance with the standard methods of the Cochrane Neonatal Review Group.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified four randomised controlled trials in which a total of 496 infants participated. Few participants were extremely low birth weight or growth restricted. The trials defined slow advancement as daily increments of 15 to 20 ml/kg and faster advancement as 30 to 35 ml/kg. Meta-analyses did not detect statistically significant effects on the risk of NEC (typical relative risk 0.91, 95% confidence interval 0.47 to 1.75) or all cause mortality (typical relative risk 1.43, 95% confidence interval 0.78 to 2.61). Infants who had slow rates of feed volume advancement took significantly longer to regain birth weight [reported median difference 2 to 6 days] and to establish full enteral feeding [reported median difference 2 to 5 days].

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Current data do not provide evidence that slow advancement of enteral feed volumes reduces the risk of NEC in VLBW infants. Increasing the volume of enteral feeds at slow rather than faster rates results in several days delay in regaining birth weight and establishing full enteral feeds but the long term clinical importance of these effects is unclear. Further randomised controlled trials are needed to determine how the rate of daily increment in enteral feed volumes affects clinical outcomes in VLBW infants.

Slow versus rapid enteral feeding advancement in preterm newborn infants 1000-1499 g: a randomized controlled trial

AIM

To evaluate whether preterm neonates weighing 1000-1499 g at birth receiving rapid enteral feeding advancement at 30 mL/kg/day attain full feedings (180 mL/kg/day) earlier than those receiving slow enteral feeding advancement at 20 mL/kg/day without increase in the incidence of feeding intolerance or necrotizing enterocolitis.

METHODS

A total of 100 stable intramural neonates weighing between 1000 and 1499 g and gestational age less than 34 weeks were randomly allocated to enteral feeding (expressed human milk or formula) advancement of 20 mL/kg/day (n = 50) or 30 mL/kg/day (n = 50).

RESULTS

Neonates in the rapid feeding advancement group achieved full volume feedings before the slow advancement group (median 7 days vs. 9 days) (p < 0.001), had significantly fewer days of intravenous fluids (median 2 days vs. 3.4 days) (p < 0.001), shorter length of stay in hospital (median 9.5 days vs. 11 days) (p = 0.003) and regained birth weight earlier (median 16 days vs. 22 days) (p < 0.001). There were no statistical differences in the proportion of infants with apnea, feed interruption or feed intolerance.

CONCLUSION

Rapid enteral feeding advancements of 30 mL/kg/day are well tolerated by stable preterm neonates weighing 1000-1499 g.

Early trophic feeding for very low birth weight infants

BACKGROUND

The introduction of enteral feeds for very low birth weight (VLBW) infants is often delayed due to concern that early introduction may not be tolerated and may increase the risk of necrotising enterocolitis. However, enteral fasting may diminish the functional adaptation of the immature gastrointestinal tract and prolong the need for parenteral nutrition with its attendant infectious and metabolic risks. Early trophic feeding, giving infants very small volumes of milk during the first week after birth, may promote intestinal maturation, enhance feeding tolerance and decrease time to reach full enteral feeding independently of parenteral nutrition.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effect of early trophic feeding versus enteral fasting on feed tolerance, growth, and the incidence of necrotising enterocolitis, mortality and other morbidities in VLBW infants.

SEARCH STRATEGY

The standard search strategy of the Cochrane Neonatal Group was used. Searches were made of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, The Cochrane Library, Issue 1, 2009), MEDLINE (1966 - February 2009), EMBASE (1980 - February 2009), CINAHL (1982 - February 2009), conference proceedings, and previous reviews.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials that assessed the effects of early trophic feeding (milk volumes up to 24 ml/kg/day introduced before 96 hours postnatal age and continued until at least one week after birth) versus a comparable period of enteral fasting in VLBW infants.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

The standard methods of the Cochrane Neonatal Group were used, with separate evaluation of trial quality and data extraction by two review authors. Data were synthesised using a fixed effects model and reported using typical relative risk, typical risk difference and weighted mean difference.

MAIN RESULTS

Nine trials, in which a total of 754 VLBW infants participated, were eligible for inclusion. These trials did not provide any evidence that early trophic feeding affected feed tolerance or growth rates in VLBW infants. Meta-analysis did not detect a statistically significant effect on the incidence of necrotising enterocolitis: typical relative risk 1.07 (95% confidence interval 0.67, 1.70); typical risk difference 0.01 (95% confidence interval -0.04, 0.05).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The available data cannot exclude important beneficial or harmful effects and are insufficient to inform clinical practice. Further large pragmatic randomised controlled trials are needed to determine how early trophic feeding compared with enteral fasting affects important clinical outcomes in VLBW infants.

Earlier initiation of enteral nutrition is associated with lower risk of late-onset bacteremia only in most mature very low birth weight infants

OBJECTIVE

To examine the temporal relationship between early enteral nutrition (EN) and coagulase-negative staphylococcal (CoNS)-related late-onset bacteremia (LOB) in very low birth weight (VLBW) neonates.

STUDY DESIGN

Multivariate analyses performed on a large retrospective cohort of neonates admitted to a tertiary care neonatal unit.

RESULTS

Due to the predominance and particular timing of CoNS, LOB occurred mostly during a critical period peaking at 9 days of age. This period also corresponded to a gestational maturation-dependent breakpoint in time to achieve full EN, associated with significant reduction in incidence of bacteremia (adjusted OR 0.15; 95%CI [0.10-0.20]; P<0.05). In subgroup analyses, more 'mature' (i.e. >or=28 and <32 weeks) preterm neonates reached full EN before this critical period and consequently, earlier EN in this group was associated with a shorter duration of PN and reduced incidence of CoNS bacteremia. In contrast, most 'immature' preterm neonates (i.e. <28 weeks) generally received PN beyond this critical period and therefore, did not appear to benefit from earlier initiation of EN. Even though EN was usually initiated earlier when formula milk was used as a complement to breast-milk, this practice was not associated with a reduction in the incidence of CoNS in any preterm gestational groups tested.

CONCLUSION

A reduction in incidence of bacteremia was observed only in more mature VLBW neonates who achieved full EN before the second-week of life critical period for CoNS, These results provide important endpoints for future trials evaluating changes in nutritional interventions potentially effective in reducing neonatal LOB.

Delayed introduction of progressive enteral feeds to prevent necrotising enterocolitis in very low birth weight infants

BACKGROUND

The introduction of progressive enteral feeds for very low birth weight infants is often delayed for several days or longer after birth due to concern that earlier introduction may not be tolerated and may increase the risk of necrotising enterocolitis. However, delaying enteral feeding could diminish the functional adaptation of the gastrointestinal tract and prolong the need for parenteral nutrition with its attendant infectious and metabolic risks.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effect of delayed introduction of progressive enteral feeds on the incidence of necrotising enterocolitis, mortality and other morbidities in very low birth weight infants.

SEARCH STRATEGY

The standard search strategy of the Cochrane Neonatal Group was used. Searches were made of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, The Cochrane Library, Issue 4, 2007), MEDLINE (1966 - December 2007), EMBASE (1980 - December 2007), CINAHL (1982- December 2007), conference proceedings, and previous reviews.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials that assessed the effect of delayed (after 96 hours' postnatal age) versus earlier introduction of progressive enteral feeds on the incidence of necrotising enterocolitis, mortality and other morbidities in very low birth weight infants.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

The standard methods of the Cochrane Neonatal Group were used, with separate evaluation of trial quality and data extraction by two authors. Data were synthesised using a fixed effects model and reported using typical relative risk, typical risk difference and weighted mean difference.

MAIN RESULTS

Two small trials in which a total of 74 infants participated were eligible for inclusion. Only a minority of participants were of extremely low birth weight or extreme preterm gestation. These trials provided no evidence that delayed introduction of progressive enteral feeds affected the incidence of necrotising enterocolitis, mortality or other neonatal morbidities. However, in view of the small number of participants, important beneficial or harmful effects cannot be excluded.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The available data are insufficient to inform clinical practice. Further large pragmatic randomised controlled trials are needed to determine how the timing of the introduction of progressive enteral feeds affects important clinical outcomes in very low birth weight infants, and particularly in extremely low birth weight or growth restricted infants.

Slow advancement of enteral feed volumes to prevent necrotising enterocolitis in very low birth weight infants

BACKGROUND

The major modifiable risk factors for necrotising enterocolitis in very low birth weight infants relate to enteral feeding regimens. Observational studies suggest that conservative feeding regimens such as delaying the introduction of enteral feeds or slowly advancing feed volumes reduce the risk of necrotising enterocolitis

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effect of slow rates of enteral feed advancement on the incidence of necrotising enterocolitis, mortality and other morbidities in very low birth weight infants.

SEARCH STRATEGY

The standard search strategy of the Cochrane Neonatal Group was used. Searches were made of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, The Cochrane Library, Issue 4, 2007), MEDLINE (1966 - December 2007), EMBASE (1980 - December 2007), CINAHL (1982- December 2007), conference proceedings, and previous reviews.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials that assessed the effect of slow (up to 24 ml/kg/day) versus faster rates of advancement of enteral feed volumes upon the incidence of necrotising enterocolitis in very low birth weight infants.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

The standard methods of the Cochrane Neonatal Group were used, with separate evaluation of trial quality and data extraction by two authors. Data were synthesised using a fixed effects model and reported using typical relative risk, typical risk difference and weighted mean difference.

MAIN RESULTS

Three randomised controlled trials in which a total of 396 infants participated were identified. Few participants were extremely low birth weight or growth restricted. The trials were generally of good methodological quality but caregivers and investigators were aware of the allocated interventions. Meta-analyses did not detect statistically significant effects on the risk of necrotising enterocolitis [typical relative risk 0.96 (95% confidence interval 0.48 to 1.92); typical risk difference 0.00 (95% confidence interval -0.05 to 0.05)] or all cause mortality [typical relative risk 1.40 (95% confidence interval 0.71 to 2.80); typical risk difference 0.03 (95% confidence interval -0.03 to 0.10)]. Infants who had slow rates of feed volume advancement took longer to regain birth weight [reported median difference between two and five days] and to establish full enteral feeding [reported median difference between three and five days]. No statistically significant effect on the total duration of hospital stay was detected.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The currently available data do not provide evidence that slow advancement of enteral feed volumes reduces the risk of necrotising enterocolitis in very low birth weight infants. Increasing the volume of enteral feeds at slow rather than faster rates results in several days delay in regaining birth weight and establishing full enteral feeds but the long-term clinical importance of these effects is unclear. Further randomised controlled trials are needed to determine how the rate of daily increment in enteral feed volumes affects important clinical outcomes in very low birth weight infants, and particularly in extremely low birth weight or growth restricted infants.

Probiotics and other preventative strategies for necrotising enterocolitis

Necrotising enterocolitis (NEC) remains one of the commonest causes of death and significant morbidity in preterm infants after the first few postnatal days. NEC affects approximately 5-10% of infants born at <or=28 weeks; about a third will die. Although there do not appear to be any 'simple fixes', it is clear that there are many clinical strategies that affect NEC. There is controlled trial evidence for breast milk, fluid regimes, enteral antibiotics, immunonutrients and probiotic supplements. This paper will review the evidence relevant to current populations of preterm infants and determine which, if any, can be safely and effectively introduced into current clinical practice.