The Experts below are selected from a list of 46539 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform

William Mcguire - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Formula versus donor Breast Milk for feeding preterm or low birth weight infants
    Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2014
    Co-Authors: Maria Quigley, William Mcguire
    Abstract:

    BACKGROUND When sufficient maternal Breast Milk is not available, alternative sources of enteral nutrition for preterm or low birth weight infants are donor Breast Milk or artificial formula. Donor Breast Milk may retain some of the non-nutritive benefits of maternal Breast Milk for preterm or low birth weight infants. However, feeding with artificial formula may ensure more consistent delivery of optimal levels of nutrients. Uncertainty exists about the balance of risks and benefits of feeding formula versus donor Breast Milk for preterm or low birth weight infants. OBJECTIVES To determine the effect of feeding with formula compared with donor Breast Milk on growth and development in preterm or low birth weight infants. SEARCH METHODS We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2014, Issue 3), MEDLINE (1966 to March 2014), EMBASE (1980 to March 2014), CINAHL (1982 to March 2014), conference proceedings and previous reviews. SELECTION CRITERIA Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials comparing feeding with formula versus donor Breast Milk in preterm or low birth weight infants. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS We extracted data using the standard methods of the Cochrane Neonatal Group, with separate evaluation of trial quality and data extraction by two review authors. MAIN RESULTS Nine trials, in which 1070 infants participated, fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Four trials compared standard term formula versus donor Breast Milk and five compared nutrient-enriched preterm formula versus donor Breast Milk. Only the two most recent trials used nutrient-fortified donor Breast Milk. The trials contain various methodological quality weaknesses, specifically uncertainty about adequate allocation concealment methods in three trials and lack of blinding in most of the trials.Formula-fed infants had higher in hospital rates of increase in weight [mean difference (MD): 2.58 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.98 to 3.71) g/kg/day], length [MD 1.93 (95% CI 1.23 to 2.62) mm/week] and head circumference [MD 1.59 (95% CI 0.95 to 2.24) mm/week]. We did not find evidence of an effect on post-discharge growth rates or neurodevelopmental outcomes. Formula feeding increased the risk of necrotising enterocolitis: typical risk ratio 2.77 (95% CI 1.40 to 5.46); risk difference 0.04 (95% CI 0.02 to 0.07). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS In preterm and low birth weight infants, feeding with formula compared with donor Breast Milk results in a higher rate of short-term growth but also a higher risk of developing necrotising enterocolitis. Limited data on the comparison of feeding with formula versus nutrient-fortified donor Breast Milk are available. This limits the applicability of the findings of this review as nutrient fortification of Breast Milk is now a common practice in neonatal care. Future trials may compare growth, development and adverse outcomes in infants who receive formula Milk versus nutrient-fortified donor Breast Milk given as a supplement to maternal expressed Breast Milk or as a sole diet.

  • multinutrient fortification of human Breast Milk for preterm infants following hospital discharge
    Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2013
    Co-Authors: Ginny Henderson, Tom Fahey, William Mcguire
    Abstract:

    Background Preterm infants are usually growth restricted at hospital discharge. Feeding preterm infants after hospital discharge with multinutrient fortified Breast Milk rather than unfortified Breast Milk may facilitate more rapid catch-up growth and improve neurodevelopmental outcomes. Objectives To determine the effect of feeding preterm infants following hospital discharge with multinutrient fortified human Breast Milk versus unfortified Breast Milk on growth and development. 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 Register (CENTRAL, The Cochrane Library, 2012, Issue 3), MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL (until August 2012), conference proceedings, and previous reviews. Selection criteria Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials that compared feeding preterm infants following hospital discharge with multinutrient fortified Breast Milk compared with unfortified human Breast Milk. 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 and synthesis of data using risk ratio, risk difference and mean difference. Main results We identified two small trials involving a total of 246 infants. These did not provide evidence that multinutrient fortification of Breast Milk for three to four months after hospital discharge affected rates of growth during infancy. One trial assessed infants at 18 months corrected age and did not find any statistically significant effects on neurodevelopmental outcomes. Authors' conclusions The limited available data do not provide convincing evidence that feeding preterm infants with multinutrient fortified Breast Milk compared with unfortified Breast Milk following hospital discharge affects important outcomes including growth rates during infancy. There are no data on long-term growth. Since fortifying Breast Milk for infants fed directly from the Breast is logistically difficult and has the potential to interfere with Breast feeding, it is important to determine if mothers would support further trials of this intervention.

  • formula Milk versus donor Breast Milk for feeding preterm or low birth weight infants
    Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2007
    Co-Authors: Maria A Quigley, Ginny Henderson, Mary Y Anthony, William Mcguire
    Abstract:

    Background Maternal Breast Milk may contain less nutrients than artificial formula Milk but may confer important non-nutrient advantages for preterm or low birth weight infants. Objectives To determine the effect of feeding with formula Milk compared with maternal Breast Milk on rate of growth and developmental outcomes in preterm or low birth weight infants. Search methods The standard search strategy of the Cochrane Neonatal Review Group was used. This included electronic searches of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials Register (CENTRAL, The Cochrane Library, Issue 3, 2007), MEDLINE (1966 - June 2007) and EMBASE (1980 - June 2007) and CINAHL (1982 to June 2007) (all accessed via OVID) and previous reviews including cross references. Selection criteria Randomised controlled trials comparing feeding with formula Milk versus preterm human Milk in preterm or low birth weight infants. Data collection and analysis The standard methods of the Cochrane Neonatal Review Group were used, with separate evaluation of trial quality and data extraction by two authors. Main results No eligible trials were identified. Authors' conclusions There are no data from randomised trials of formula Milk versus maternal Breast Milk for feeding preterm or low birth weight infants. This may relate to a perceived difficulty of allocating an alternative feed to an infant whose mother wishes to feed with her own Breast Milk. Maternal Breast Milk remains the default choice of enteral nutrition because observational studies, and meta-analyses of trials comparing feeding with formula Milk versus donor Breast Milk, suggest that feeding with Breast Milk has major non-nutrient advantages for preterm or low birth weight infants.

Stephanie R Bialek - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Breast Milk acquired cytomegalovirus infection and disease in vlbw and premature infants
    Pediatrics, 2013
    Co-Authors: Tatiana M Lanzieri, Sheila C Dollard, Cassandra D Josephson, Scott D Schmid, Stephanie R Bialek
    Abstract:

    BACKGROUND: Very low birth weight (VLBW) and premature infants are at risk for developing postnatal cytomegalovirus (CMV) disease, including CMV-related sepsis-like syndrome (CMV-SLS) for which in the United States are lacking. METHODS: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to estimate the pooled proportions (and 95% confidence intervals) of VLBW and premature infants born to CMV-seropositive women with Breast Milk–acquired CMV infection and CMV-SLS. We combined these proportions with population-based rates of CMV seropositivity, Breast Milk feeding, VLBW, and prematurity to estimate annual rates of Breast Milk–acquired CMV infection and CMV-SLS in the United States. RESULTS: In our meta-analysis, among 299 infants fed untreated Breast Milk, we estimated 19% (11%–32%) acquired CMV infection and 4% (2%–7%) developed CMV-SLS. Assuming these proportions, we estimated a rate of Breast Milk–acquired CMV infection among VLBW and premature infants in the United States of 6.5% (3.7%–10.9%) and 1.4% (0.7%–2.4%) of CMV-SLS, corresponding to 600 infants with CMV-SLS in 2008. Among 212 infants fed frozen Breast Milk, our meta-analysis proportions were 13% (7%–24%) for infection and 5% (2%–12%) for CMV-SLS, yielding slightly lower rates of Breast Milk–acquired CMV infection (4.4%; 2.4%–8.2%) but similar rates of CMV-SLS (1.7%; 0.7%–4.1%). CONCLUSIONS: Breast Milk–acquired CMV infection presenting with CMV-SLS is relatively rare. Prospective studies to better define the burden of disease are needed to refine guidelines for feeding Breast Milk from CMV-seropositive mothers to VLBW and premature infants.

  • Breast Milk acquired cytomegalovirus infection and disease in vlbw and premature infants
    Pediatrics, 2013
    Co-Authors: Tatiana M Lanzieri, Sheila C Dollard, Cassandra D Josephson, Scott D Schmid, Stephanie R Bialek
    Abstract:

    BACKGROUND: Very low birth weight (VLBW) and premature infants are at risk for developing postnatal cytomegalovirus (CMV) disease, including CMV-related sepsis-like syndrome (CMV-SLS) for which in the United States are lacking. METHODS: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to estimate the pooled proportions (and 95% confidence intervals) of VLBW and premature infants born to CMV-seropositive women with Breast Milk–acquired CMV infection and CMV-SLS. We combined these proportions with population-based rates of CMV seropositivity, Breast Milk feeding, VLBW, and prematurity to estimate annual rates of Breast Milk–acquired CMV infection and CMV-SLS in the United States. Results: In our meta-analysis, among 299 infants fed untreated Breast Milk, we estimated 19% (11%–32%) acquired CMV infection and 4% (2%–7%) developed CMV-SLS. Assuming these proportions, we estimated a rate of Breast Milk–acquired CMV infection among VLBW and premature infants in the United States of 6.5% (3.7%–10.9%) and 1.4% (0.7%–2.4%) of CMV-SLS, corresponding to 600 infants with CMV-SLS in 2008. Among 212 infants fed frozen Breast Milk, our meta-analysis proportions were 13% (7%–24%) for infection and 5% (2%–12%) for CMV-SLS, yielding slightly lower rates of Breast Milk–acquired CMV infection (4.4%; 2.4%–8.2%) but similar rates of CMV-SLS (1.7%; 0.7%–4.1%). Conclusions: Breast Milk–acquired CMV infection presenting with CMV-SLS is relatively rare. Prospective studies to better define the burden of disease are needed to refine guidelines for feeding Breast Milk from CMV-seropositive mothers to VLBW and premature infants. * Abbreviations: CI — : confidence interval CMV — : cytomegalovirus SLS — : sepsis-like syndrome VLBW — : very low birth weight

Maria Quigley - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Formula versus donor Breast Milk for feeding preterm or low birth weight infants
    Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2014
    Co-Authors: Maria Quigley, William Mcguire
    Abstract:

    BACKGROUND When sufficient maternal Breast Milk is not available, alternative sources of enteral nutrition for preterm or low birth weight infants are donor Breast Milk or artificial formula. Donor Breast Milk may retain some of the non-nutritive benefits of maternal Breast Milk for preterm or low birth weight infants. However, feeding with artificial formula may ensure more consistent delivery of optimal levels of nutrients. Uncertainty exists about the balance of risks and benefits of feeding formula versus donor Breast Milk for preterm or low birth weight infants. OBJECTIVES To determine the effect of feeding with formula compared with donor Breast Milk on growth and development in preterm or low birth weight infants. SEARCH METHODS We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2014, Issue 3), MEDLINE (1966 to March 2014), EMBASE (1980 to March 2014), CINAHL (1982 to March 2014), conference proceedings and previous reviews. SELECTION CRITERIA Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials comparing feeding with formula versus donor Breast Milk in preterm or low birth weight infants. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS We extracted data using the standard methods of the Cochrane Neonatal Group, with separate evaluation of trial quality and data extraction by two review authors. MAIN RESULTS Nine trials, in which 1070 infants participated, fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Four trials compared standard term formula versus donor Breast Milk and five compared nutrient-enriched preterm formula versus donor Breast Milk. Only the two most recent trials used nutrient-fortified donor Breast Milk. The trials contain various methodological quality weaknesses, specifically uncertainty about adequate allocation concealment methods in three trials and lack of blinding in most of the trials.Formula-fed infants had higher in hospital rates of increase in weight [mean difference (MD): 2.58 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.98 to 3.71) g/kg/day], length [MD 1.93 (95% CI 1.23 to 2.62) mm/week] and head circumference [MD 1.59 (95% CI 0.95 to 2.24) mm/week]. We did not find evidence of an effect on post-discharge growth rates or neurodevelopmental outcomes. Formula feeding increased the risk of necrotising enterocolitis: typical risk ratio 2.77 (95% CI 1.40 to 5.46); risk difference 0.04 (95% CI 0.02 to 0.07). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS In preterm and low birth weight infants, feeding with formula compared with donor Breast Milk results in a higher rate of short-term growth but also a higher risk of developing necrotising enterocolitis. Limited data on the comparison of feeding with formula versus nutrient-fortified donor Breast Milk are available. This limits the applicability of the findings of this review as nutrient fortification of Breast Milk is now a common practice in neonatal care. Future trials may compare growth, development and adverse outcomes in infants who receive formula Milk versus nutrient-fortified donor Breast Milk given as a supplement to maternal expressed Breast Milk or as a sole diet.

Ginny Henderson - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • multinutrient fortification of human Breast Milk for preterm infants following hospital discharge
    Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2013
    Co-Authors: Ginny Henderson, Tom Fahey, William Mcguire
    Abstract:

    Background Preterm infants are usually growth restricted at hospital discharge. Feeding preterm infants after hospital discharge with multinutrient fortified Breast Milk rather than unfortified Breast Milk may facilitate more rapid catch-up growth and improve neurodevelopmental outcomes. Objectives To determine the effect of feeding preterm infants following hospital discharge with multinutrient fortified human Breast Milk versus unfortified Breast Milk on growth and development. 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 Register (CENTRAL, The Cochrane Library, 2012, Issue 3), MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL (until August 2012), conference proceedings, and previous reviews. Selection criteria Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials that compared feeding preterm infants following hospital discharge with multinutrient fortified Breast Milk compared with unfortified human Breast Milk. 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 and synthesis of data using risk ratio, risk difference and mean difference. Main results We identified two small trials involving a total of 246 infants. These did not provide evidence that multinutrient fortification of Breast Milk for three to four months after hospital discharge affected rates of growth during infancy. One trial assessed infants at 18 months corrected age and did not find any statistically significant effects on neurodevelopmental outcomes. Authors' conclusions The limited available data do not provide convincing evidence that feeding preterm infants with multinutrient fortified Breast Milk compared with unfortified Breast Milk following hospital discharge affects important outcomes including growth rates during infancy. There are no data on long-term growth. Since fortifying Breast Milk for infants fed directly from the Breast is logistically difficult and has the potential to interfere with Breast feeding, it is important to determine if mothers would support further trials of this intervention.

  • formula Milk versus donor Breast Milk for feeding preterm or low birth weight infants
    Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2007
    Co-Authors: Maria A Quigley, Ginny Henderson, Mary Y Anthony, William Mcguire
    Abstract:

    Background Maternal Breast Milk may contain less nutrients than artificial formula Milk but may confer important non-nutrient advantages for preterm or low birth weight infants. Objectives To determine the effect of feeding with formula Milk compared with maternal Breast Milk on rate of growth and developmental outcomes in preterm or low birth weight infants. Search methods The standard search strategy of the Cochrane Neonatal Review Group was used. This included electronic searches of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials Register (CENTRAL, The Cochrane Library, Issue 3, 2007), MEDLINE (1966 - June 2007) and EMBASE (1980 - June 2007) and CINAHL (1982 to June 2007) (all accessed via OVID) and previous reviews including cross references. Selection criteria Randomised controlled trials comparing feeding with formula Milk versus preterm human Milk in preterm or low birth weight infants. Data collection and analysis The standard methods of the Cochrane Neonatal Review Group were used, with separate evaluation of trial quality and data extraction by two authors. Main results No eligible trials were identified. Authors' conclusions There are no data from randomised trials of formula Milk versus maternal Breast Milk for feeding preterm or low birth weight infants. This may relate to a perceived difficulty of allocating an alternative feed to an infant whose mother wishes to feed with her own Breast Milk. Maternal Breast Milk remains the default choice of enteral nutrition because observational studies, and meta-analyses of trials comparing feeding with formula Milk versus donor Breast Milk, suggest that feeding with Breast Milk has major non-nutrient advantages for preterm or low birth weight infants.

Tatiana M Lanzieri - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Breast Milk acquired cytomegalovirus infection and disease in vlbw and premature infants
    Pediatrics, 2013
    Co-Authors: Tatiana M Lanzieri, Sheila C Dollard, Cassandra D Josephson, Scott D Schmid, Stephanie R Bialek
    Abstract:

    BACKGROUND: Very low birth weight (VLBW) and premature infants are at risk for developing postnatal cytomegalovirus (CMV) disease, including CMV-related sepsis-like syndrome (CMV-SLS) for which in the United States are lacking. METHODS: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to estimate the pooled proportions (and 95% confidence intervals) of VLBW and premature infants born to CMV-seropositive women with Breast Milk–acquired CMV infection and CMV-SLS. We combined these proportions with population-based rates of CMV seropositivity, Breast Milk feeding, VLBW, and prematurity to estimate annual rates of Breast Milk–acquired CMV infection and CMV-SLS in the United States. RESULTS: In our meta-analysis, among 299 infants fed untreated Breast Milk, we estimated 19% (11%–32%) acquired CMV infection and 4% (2%–7%) developed CMV-SLS. Assuming these proportions, we estimated a rate of Breast Milk–acquired CMV infection among VLBW and premature infants in the United States of 6.5% (3.7%–10.9%) and 1.4% (0.7%–2.4%) of CMV-SLS, corresponding to 600 infants with CMV-SLS in 2008. Among 212 infants fed frozen Breast Milk, our meta-analysis proportions were 13% (7%–24%) for infection and 5% (2%–12%) for CMV-SLS, yielding slightly lower rates of Breast Milk–acquired CMV infection (4.4%; 2.4%–8.2%) but similar rates of CMV-SLS (1.7%; 0.7%–4.1%). CONCLUSIONS: Breast Milk–acquired CMV infection presenting with CMV-SLS is relatively rare. Prospective studies to better define the burden of disease are needed to refine guidelines for feeding Breast Milk from CMV-seropositive mothers to VLBW and premature infants.

  • Breast Milk acquired cytomegalovirus infection and disease in vlbw and premature infants
    Pediatrics, 2013
    Co-Authors: Tatiana M Lanzieri, Sheila C Dollard, Cassandra D Josephson, Scott D Schmid, Stephanie R Bialek
    Abstract:

    BACKGROUND: Very low birth weight (VLBW) and premature infants are at risk for developing postnatal cytomegalovirus (CMV) disease, including CMV-related sepsis-like syndrome (CMV-SLS) for which in the United States are lacking. METHODS: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to estimate the pooled proportions (and 95% confidence intervals) of VLBW and premature infants born to CMV-seropositive women with Breast Milk–acquired CMV infection and CMV-SLS. We combined these proportions with population-based rates of CMV seropositivity, Breast Milk feeding, VLBW, and prematurity to estimate annual rates of Breast Milk–acquired CMV infection and CMV-SLS in the United States. Results: In our meta-analysis, among 299 infants fed untreated Breast Milk, we estimated 19% (11%–32%) acquired CMV infection and 4% (2%–7%) developed CMV-SLS. Assuming these proportions, we estimated a rate of Breast Milk–acquired CMV infection among VLBW and premature infants in the United States of 6.5% (3.7%–10.9%) and 1.4% (0.7%–2.4%) of CMV-SLS, corresponding to 600 infants with CMV-SLS in 2008. Among 212 infants fed frozen Breast Milk, our meta-analysis proportions were 13% (7%–24%) for infection and 5% (2%–12%) for CMV-SLS, yielding slightly lower rates of Breast Milk–acquired CMV infection (4.4%; 2.4%–8.2%) but similar rates of CMV-SLS (1.7%; 0.7%–4.1%). Conclusions: Breast Milk–acquired CMV infection presenting with CMV-SLS is relatively rare. Prospective studies to better define the burden of disease are needed to refine guidelines for feeding Breast Milk from CMV-seropositive mothers to VLBW and premature infants. * Abbreviations: CI — : confidence interval CMV — : cytomegalovirus SLS — : sepsis-like syndrome VLBW — : very low birth weight