Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr ; 68(1): 116-123, 2019 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30320665

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of the present randomized controlled clinical trial was to compare the use of donkey milk-derived fortifier (DF) with commercial bovine milk-derived fortifier (BF) in very preterm or very-low-birth-weight newborns, in terms of feeding tolerance. METHODS: This trial included 156 newborns born at <32 weeks of gestational age and/or with a birth weight ≤1500 g. Newborns were randomized 1:1 to receive enteral feeding with either a BF-arm, or a new, DF-arm for 21 days. The fortification protocol was the same for both study arms, and the 2 diets were designed to be isoproteic and isocaloric. Feeding tolerance was assessed by a standardized protocol. RESULTS: The risk of feeding intolerance tended to be lower in DF-arm than in BF-arm, with a relative risk reduction of 0.63 (95% confidence interval: -0.29, +0.90). The mean number of episodes per newborn of feeding intolerance and feeding interruptions (any duration) were consistently lower in the DF-arm than in the BF-arm. Episodes of bilious gastric residuals and vomiting were significantly lower in the DF-arm. Time needed to reach full enteral feeding (150 mL ·â€Škg ·â€Šday) and daily weight increase between the first day of exclusive enteral feeding (ie, without administering intravenous fluids) and discharge were similar in the BF- and DF-arms. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that DF improve feeding tolerance when compared with standard bovine-derived fortifiers, with a similar auxological outcome.


Subject(s)
Enteral Nutrition/methods , Food, Fortified , Infant, Premature/growth & development , Infant, Very Low Birth Weight/growth & development , Milk, Human , Milk , Animals , Equidae , Female , Humans , Infant Nutritional Physiological Phenomena , Infant, Newborn , Male , Nutritional Status , Weight Gain
2.
J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med ; 25 Suppl 1: 67-9, 2012 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-22348405

ABSTRACT

The ability to recognize abnormal growth at birth and/or an intrauterine malnutrition is of great importance for neonatal care and prognosis. The current gold standard in neonatal auxological evaluation is based on information obtained from both neonatal anthropometric charts and intrauterine growth charts. Numerous charts have been proposed, but they are hardly comparable with each other, due to numerous methodological problems. The Italian Society of Neonatology, the Italian Society of Pediatric Endocrinology and Diabetology and the Italian Society of Medical Statistics and Clinical Epidemiology promoted a multicenter survey with the aim to produce an Italian neonatal anthropometric reference (Italian Neonatal Study [INeS] charts) fulfilling the set of the criteria that a reliable neonatal chart should possess. In clinical practice neonatal charts have some limitations if they are used to monitor postnatal growth of preterm newborns from birth to term. To overcome the problems related to the construction and use of a reference, an international project has recently started a study aiming to create prescriptive standard for the evaluation of postnatal growth of preterm infants (INTERGROWTH-21st). While an international longitudinal standard for evaluating preterm infant postnatal growth is lacking, in Italy the best compromise is likely to be as follows: new INeS charts up to term; International longitudinal charts WHO 2006 or CDC 2002 from term to 2 years; finally, the Italian Society for Pediatric Endocrinology and Diabetes (SIEDP) growth charts could be suitable for monitoring the growth of these infants from 2 years up to 20 years of age.


Subject(s)
Anthropometry , Growth Charts , Infant, Newborn , Fetal Growth Retardation/diagnosis , Humans , Infant, Premature , Infant, Small for Gestational Age
3.
J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med ; 24 Suppl 2: 9-11, 2011 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-21740326

ABSTRACT

The past two decades have seen a progressive improvement in the survival rates of preterm infants, especially in neonates <30 weeks of gestational age. These neonates constitute the large majority of the population in neonatal intensive care units. The correct evaluation of postnatal growth of these babies is nowadays of primary concern, although the definition of their optimal postnatal growth pattern is still controversial. Concerns have also been raised about the strategies to monitor their growth, specifically in relation to the charts used. At present the available charts in clinical practice are fetal growth charts, neonatal anthropometric charts and postnatal growth charts for term infants. None of these, for different reasons, is suitable to correctly evaluate preterm infant growth. An international multicentric project has recently started a study aiming at building a prescriptive standard for the evaluation of postnatal growth of preterm infants and it will be available in the next years providing a population that is conceptually as close as possible to the prescriptive approach used for the construction of the WHO infant and child growth standards. At present, while an international longitudinal standard for evaluating preterm infant postnatal growth is lacking, in Italy the best compromise in clinical practice is likely to be as follows: new Italian INeS (Italian Neonatal Study) charts up to term; International longitudinal charts WHO 2006 or CDC 2002 from term to two years; finally the Italian Society for Pediatric Endocrinology and Diabetes (SIEDP) 2006 growth charts could be suitable for monitoring the growth of these infants from two years up to 20 years of age.


Subject(s)
Body Weights and Measures/methods , Child Development/physiology , Infant, Premature/growth & development , Body Weights and Measures/standards , Gestational Age , Growth Charts , Humans , Infant, Newborn , Reference Standards , Term Birth/physiology
4.
J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med ; 24 Suppl 1: 85-7, 2011 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-21942599

ABSTRACT

Breastfeeding is linked both to a greater jaundice frequency and intensity in the first postnatal days ("breastfeeding jaundice") and to visible jaundice persisting beyond the first two weeks of life ("breast milk jaundice"), but the appearance of skin jaundice is not a reason for interrupting breastfeeding which can and should continue without any interruption in most cases. There have been numerous contributions to the literature, which have rescaled the direct role of breast milk, both in early jaundice and in the more severe cases of late jaundice. In fact, the reviewed guidelines for detection and management of hyperbilirubinemia underline, how prevention of badly managed breastfeeding and early support for the couple mother-child are effective prevention measures against severe early-onset jaundice; furthermore, the breastfeeding interruption is no longer recommended as a diagnostic procedure to identify breast milk jaundice because of its low specificity and the risk to disregarding the detection of a potentially dangerous disease.


Subject(s)
Jaundice, Neonatal/etiology , Milk, Human/physiology , Breast Feeding/adverse effects , Humans , Infant, Newborn , Jaundice , Jaundice, Neonatal/therapy
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...