Comparison of the effect of two human milk fortifiers on clinical outcomes in premature infants

Melissa Thoene, Corrine K Hanson, Elizabeth Lyden, Laura Dugick, Leslie Ruybal, Ann L Anderson Berry

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

25 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The use of human milk fortifiers (HMF) helps to meet the high nutritional requirements of the human milk-fed premature infant. Previously available powdered products have not met the protein requirements of the preterm infant population and many neonatologists add powder protein modulars to help meet protein needs. The use of powdered products is discouraged in neonatal intensive care units (NICU) due to concern for invasive infection. The use of a commercially available acidified liquid product with higher protein content was implemented to address these two concerns. During the course of this implementation, poor growth and clinically significant acidosis of infants on Acidified Liquid HMF (ALHMF) was observed. The purpose of this study was to quantify those observations by comparing infant outcomes between groups receiving the ALHMF vs. infants receiving powdered HMF (PHMF). A retrospective chart review compared outcomes of human milk-fed premature infants <2000 g receiving the ALHMF (n = 23) and the PHMF (n = 46). Infant growth, enteral feeding tolerance and provision, and incidence of necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC), metabolic acidosis, and diaper dermatitis were compared between the two groups. No infants were excluded from this study based on acuity. Use of ALHMF resulted in a higher incidence of metabolic acidosis (p = 0.002). Growth while on HMF as measured in both g/kg/day (10.59 vs. 15.37, p < 0.0001) and in g/day (23.66 vs. 31.27, p = 0.0001) was slower in the ALHMF group, on increased mean cal/kg/day (128.7 vs. 117.3, p = 0.13) with nearly twice as many infants on the ALHMF requiring increased fortification of enteral feedings beyond 24 cal/ounce to promote adequate growth (48% vs. 26%, p = 0.10). Although we were not powered to study NEC as a primary outcome, NEC was significantly increased in the ALHMF group. (13% vs. 0%, p = 0.03). Use of a LHMF in an unrestricted NICU population resulted in an increase in clinical complications within a high-acuity NICU, including metabolic acidosis and poor growth. Although further research is needed to assess outcomes among infants with a variety of clinical acuities, gestational ages, and weights to confirm these findings, based on this experience, caution is urged to avoid potential risks.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)261-275
Number of pages15
JournalNutrients
Volume6
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 3 2014

Fingerprint

Human Milk
breast milk
Premature Infants
liquids
Acidosis
acidosis
Necrotizing Enterocolitis
enterocolitis
Neonatal Intensive Care Units
Growth
Enteral Nutrition
enteral feeding
Proteins
Nutritional Requirements
infant growth
incidence
Incidence
Dermatitis
protein requirement
gestational age

Keywords

  • Acidosis
  • Fortifier
  • Growth
  • Human milk
  • Infant feeding
  • Prematurity

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Food Science
  • Nutrition and Dietetics

Cite this

Comparison of the effect of two human milk fortifiers on clinical outcomes in premature infants. / Thoene, Melissa; Hanson, Corrine K; Lyden, Elizabeth; Dugick, Laura; Ruybal, Leslie; Anderson Berry, Ann L.

In: Nutrients, Vol. 6, No. 1, 03.01.2014, p. 261-275.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Thoene, Melissa ; Hanson, Corrine K ; Lyden, Elizabeth ; Dugick, Laura ; Ruybal, Leslie ; Anderson Berry, Ann L. / Comparison of the effect of two human milk fortifiers on clinical outcomes in premature infants. In: Nutrients. 2014 ; Vol. 6, No. 1. pp. 261-275.
@article{3f6c263ad2f343608a493b1930f3621c,
title = "Comparison of the effect of two human milk fortifiers on clinical outcomes in premature infants",
abstract = "The use of human milk fortifiers (HMF) helps to meet the high nutritional requirements of the human milk-fed premature infant. Previously available powdered products have not met the protein requirements of the preterm infant population and many neonatologists add powder protein modulars to help meet protein needs. The use of powdered products is discouraged in neonatal intensive care units (NICU) due to concern for invasive infection. The use of a commercially available acidified liquid product with higher protein content was implemented to address these two concerns. During the course of this implementation, poor growth and clinically significant acidosis of infants on Acidified Liquid HMF (ALHMF) was observed. The purpose of this study was to quantify those observations by comparing infant outcomes between groups receiving the ALHMF vs. infants receiving powdered HMF (PHMF). A retrospective chart review compared outcomes of human milk-fed premature infants <2000 g receiving the ALHMF (n = 23) and the PHMF (n = 46). Infant growth, enteral feeding tolerance and provision, and incidence of necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC), metabolic acidosis, and diaper dermatitis were compared between the two groups. No infants were excluded from this study based on acuity. Use of ALHMF resulted in a higher incidence of metabolic acidosis (p = 0.002). Growth while on HMF as measured in both g/kg/day (10.59 vs. 15.37, p < 0.0001) and in g/day (23.66 vs. 31.27, p = 0.0001) was slower in the ALHMF group, on increased mean cal/kg/day (128.7 vs. 117.3, p = 0.13) with nearly twice as many infants on the ALHMF requiring increased fortification of enteral feedings beyond 24 cal/ounce to promote adequate growth (48{\%} vs. 26{\%}, p = 0.10). Although we were not powered to study NEC as a primary outcome, NEC was significantly increased in the ALHMF group. (13{\%} vs. 0{\%}, p = 0.03). Use of a LHMF in an unrestricted NICU population resulted in an increase in clinical complications within a high-acuity NICU, including metabolic acidosis and poor growth. Although further research is needed to assess outcomes among infants with a variety of clinical acuities, gestational ages, and weights to confirm these findings, based on this experience, caution is urged to avoid potential risks.",
keywords = "Acidosis, Fortifier, Growth, Human milk, Infant feeding, Prematurity",
author = "Melissa Thoene and Hanson, {Corrine K} and Elizabeth Lyden and Laura Dugick and Leslie Ruybal and {Anderson Berry}, {Ann L}",
year = "2014",
month = "1",
day = "3",
doi = "10.3390/nu6010261",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "6",
pages = "261--275",
journal = "Nutrients",
issn = "2072-6643",
publisher = "Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute (MDPI)",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparison of the effect of two human milk fortifiers on clinical outcomes in premature infants

AU - Thoene, Melissa

AU - Hanson, Corrine K

AU - Lyden, Elizabeth

AU - Dugick, Laura

AU - Ruybal, Leslie

AU - Anderson Berry, Ann L

PY - 2014/1/3

Y1 - 2014/1/3

N2 - The use of human milk fortifiers (HMF) helps to meet the high nutritional requirements of the human milk-fed premature infant. Previously available powdered products have not met the protein requirements of the preterm infant population and many neonatologists add powder protein modulars to help meet protein needs. The use of powdered products is discouraged in neonatal intensive care units (NICU) due to concern for invasive infection. The use of a commercially available acidified liquid product with higher protein content was implemented to address these two concerns. During the course of this implementation, poor growth and clinically significant acidosis of infants on Acidified Liquid HMF (ALHMF) was observed. The purpose of this study was to quantify those observations by comparing infant outcomes between groups receiving the ALHMF vs. infants receiving powdered HMF (PHMF). A retrospective chart review compared outcomes of human milk-fed premature infants <2000 g receiving the ALHMF (n = 23) and the PHMF (n = 46). Infant growth, enteral feeding tolerance and provision, and incidence of necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC), metabolic acidosis, and diaper dermatitis were compared between the two groups. No infants were excluded from this study based on acuity. Use of ALHMF resulted in a higher incidence of metabolic acidosis (p = 0.002). Growth while on HMF as measured in both g/kg/day (10.59 vs. 15.37, p < 0.0001) and in g/day (23.66 vs. 31.27, p = 0.0001) was slower in the ALHMF group, on increased mean cal/kg/day (128.7 vs. 117.3, p = 0.13) with nearly twice as many infants on the ALHMF requiring increased fortification of enteral feedings beyond 24 cal/ounce to promote adequate growth (48% vs. 26%, p = 0.10). Although we were not powered to study NEC as a primary outcome, NEC was significantly increased in the ALHMF group. (13% vs. 0%, p = 0.03). Use of a LHMF in an unrestricted NICU population resulted in an increase in clinical complications within a high-acuity NICU, including metabolic acidosis and poor growth. Although further research is needed to assess outcomes among infants with a variety of clinical acuities, gestational ages, and weights to confirm these findings, based on this experience, caution is urged to avoid potential risks.

AB - The use of human milk fortifiers (HMF) helps to meet the high nutritional requirements of the human milk-fed premature infant. Previously available powdered products have not met the protein requirements of the preterm infant population and many neonatologists add powder protein modulars to help meet protein needs. The use of powdered products is discouraged in neonatal intensive care units (NICU) due to concern for invasive infection. The use of a commercially available acidified liquid product with higher protein content was implemented to address these two concerns. During the course of this implementation, poor growth and clinically significant acidosis of infants on Acidified Liquid HMF (ALHMF) was observed. The purpose of this study was to quantify those observations by comparing infant outcomes between groups receiving the ALHMF vs. infants receiving powdered HMF (PHMF). A retrospective chart review compared outcomes of human milk-fed premature infants <2000 g receiving the ALHMF (n = 23) and the PHMF (n = 46). Infant growth, enteral feeding tolerance and provision, and incidence of necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC), metabolic acidosis, and diaper dermatitis were compared between the two groups. No infants were excluded from this study based on acuity. Use of ALHMF resulted in a higher incidence of metabolic acidosis (p = 0.002). Growth while on HMF as measured in both g/kg/day (10.59 vs. 15.37, p < 0.0001) and in g/day (23.66 vs. 31.27, p = 0.0001) was slower in the ALHMF group, on increased mean cal/kg/day (128.7 vs. 117.3, p = 0.13) with nearly twice as many infants on the ALHMF requiring increased fortification of enteral feedings beyond 24 cal/ounce to promote adequate growth (48% vs. 26%, p = 0.10). Although we were not powered to study NEC as a primary outcome, NEC was significantly increased in the ALHMF group. (13% vs. 0%, p = 0.03). Use of a LHMF in an unrestricted NICU population resulted in an increase in clinical complications within a high-acuity NICU, including metabolic acidosis and poor growth. Although further research is needed to assess outcomes among infants with a variety of clinical acuities, gestational ages, and weights to confirm these findings, based on this experience, caution is urged to avoid potential risks.

KW - Acidosis

KW - Fortifier

KW - Growth

KW - Human milk

KW - Infant feeding

KW - Prematurity

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84891640259&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84891640259&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.3390/nu6010261

DO - 10.3390/nu6010261

M3 - Article

C2 - 24394538

AN - SCOPUS:84891640259

VL - 6

SP - 261

EP - 275

JO - Nutrients

JF - Nutrients

SN - 2072-6643

IS - 1

ER -