ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: As the importance of breastfeeding has been reinforced, human milk is often stored for practical reasons. Therefore, we evaluated optimal storage and processing methods for human milk from a nutritional standpoint. METHODS: Human milk samples were collected between June 2017 and February 2018. Also, data about maternal information were collected. Human milk was analyzed for macronutrients and caloric content. The samples were subdivided into groups for nutrient analysis. The control group (fresh milk) was not stored or processed. The other groups (9 groups) consisted of samples analyzed based on different storage temperatures (room temperature, refrigerated, frozen), defrosting methods (bottle warmer, room temperature thawing, microwave oven), and storage period (1 week, 1 month, 2 months) and compared with the control group. RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference in the nutrient content of human milk among the collected samples. A significant change in the content of macronutrients in milk samples was observed under storage condition at different temperatures for 1 week with subsequent thawing with bottle warmer compared to fresh milk. Under storage at −20°C for 1 week with subsequent thawing with different defrosting methods, a significant change in the content of macronutrients in milk samples was observed compared to fresh milk. After storage at −20°C for different periods and thawing with a bottle warmer, a significant change in macronutrient content in milk samples was observed compared to fresh milk regardless of the storage period. CONCLUSION: Unlike previous guidelines, changes in macronutrient content in milk samples were observed regardless of the method of storing and thawing. Apparently, it is proposed that mothers should feed fresh human milk to their babies without storing.
Subject(s)
Humans , Breast Feeding , Infant Formula , Methods , Microwaves , Milk , Milk, Human , MothersABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Because desflurane can cause airway irritability when used to induce anesthesia, drugs aimed at reducing airway irritability. This study investigated the possible differences between lidocaine and alfentanil on the decrease in the airway irritability during desflurane inhaled induction. METHODS: 75 patients (25 in each groups) were assigned randomly to induce anesthesia with inhaled desflurane. The breathing circuit was primed with desflurane 6% in 50% O2 and 50% N2O. After pretreatment with 2% lidocaine (1 mg/kg), or alfentanil (10microgram/kg), or saline (7 ml) intravenously 2 minutes before inducing anesthesia, each patient breathed the gas mixture through a tight fitting facemask. The time to loss of consciousness, cough, laryngospasm, excitatory movement and hemodynamics were checked before and after inhalation. RESULTS: The time to loss of consciousness, cough and excitatory movement were lower significantly between in the control group and other groups, but there was no difference between the 2% lidocaine and alfentanil groups. The blood pressure and heart rate were lower in the alfentanil group, but the heart rate was similar. CONCLUSIONS: These results explain that intravenous 2% lidocaine appears to be useful. However, Intravenous alfentanil can also reduce the airway irritability and stabilize the hemodynamics significantly when desflurane is used to induce anesthesia.