Cargando…

Probiotics, prebiotics infant formula use in preterm or low birth weight infants: a systematic review

BACKGROUND: Previous reviews (2005 to 2009) on preterm infants given probiotics or prebiotics with breast milk or mixed feeds focused on prevention of Necrotizing Enterocolitis, sepsis and diarrhea. This review assessed if probiotics, prebiotics led to improved growth and clinical outcomes in formul...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Mugambi, Mary N, Musekiwa, Alfred, Lombard, Martani, Young, Taryn, Blaauw, Reneé
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2012
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3487753/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22928998
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1475-2891-11-58
_version_ 1782248507315322880
author Mugambi, Mary N
Musekiwa, Alfred
Lombard, Martani
Young, Taryn
Blaauw, Reneé
author_facet Mugambi, Mary N
Musekiwa, Alfred
Lombard, Martani
Young, Taryn
Blaauw, Reneé
author_sort Mugambi, Mary N
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Previous reviews (2005 to 2009) on preterm infants given probiotics or prebiotics with breast milk or mixed feeds focused on prevention of Necrotizing Enterocolitis, sepsis and diarrhea. This review assessed if probiotics, prebiotics led to improved growth and clinical outcomes in formula fed preterm infants. METHODS: Cochrane methodology was followed using randomized controlled trials (RCTs) which compared preterm formula containing probiotic(s) or prebiotic(s) to conventional preterm formula in preterm infants. The mean difference (MD) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI) were reported for continuous outcomes, risk ratio (RR) and corresponding 95% CI for dichotomous outcomes. Heterogeneity was assessed by visual inspection of forest plots and a chi(2) test. An I(2) test assessed inconsistencies across studies. I(2)> 50% represented substantial heterogeneity. RESULTS: Four probiotics studies (N=212), 4 prebiotics studies (N=126) were included. Probiotics: There were no significant differences in weight gain (MD 1.96, 95% CI: -2.64 to 6.56, 2 studies, n=34) or in maximal enteral feed (MD 35.20, 95% CI: -7.61 to 78.02, 2 studies, n=34), number of stools per day increased significantly in probiotic group (MD 1.60, 95% CI: 1.20 to 2.00, 1 study, n=20). Prebiotics: Galacto-oligosaccharide / Fructo-oligosaccharide (GOS/FOS) yielded no significant difference in weight gain (MD 0.04, 95% CI: -2.65 to 2.73, 2 studies, n=50), GOS/FOS yielded no significant differences in length gain (MD 0.01, 95% CI: -0.03 to 0.04, 2 studies, n=50). There were no significant differences in head growth (MD −0.01, 95% CI: -0.02 to 0.00, 2 studies, n=76) or age at full enteral feed (MD −0.79, 95% CI: -2.20 to 0.61, 2 studies, n=86). Stool frequency increased significantly in prebiotic group (MD 0.80, 95% CI: 0.48 to 1.1, 2 studies, n=86). GOS/FOS and FOS yielded higher bifidobacteria counts in prebiotics group (MD 2.10, 95% CI: 0.96 to 3.24, n=27) and (MD 0.48, 95% CI: 0.28 to 0.68, n=56). CONCLUSIONS: There is not enough evidence to state that supplementation with probiotics or prebiotics results in improved growth and clinical outcomes in exclusively formula fed preterm infants.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3487753
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2012
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-34877532012-11-03 Probiotics, prebiotics infant formula use in preterm or low birth weight infants: a systematic review Mugambi, Mary N Musekiwa, Alfred Lombard, Martani Young, Taryn Blaauw, Reneé Nutr J Review BACKGROUND: Previous reviews (2005 to 2009) on preterm infants given probiotics or prebiotics with breast milk or mixed feeds focused on prevention of Necrotizing Enterocolitis, sepsis and diarrhea. This review assessed if probiotics, prebiotics led to improved growth and clinical outcomes in formula fed preterm infants. METHODS: Cochrane methodology was followed using randomized controlled trials (RCTs) which compared preterm formula containing probiotic(s) or prebiotic(s) to conventional preterm formula in preterm infants. The mean difference (MD) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI) were reported for continuous outcomes, risk ratio (RR) and corresponding 95% CI for dichotomous outcomes. Heterogeneity was assessed by visual inspection of forest plots and a chi(2) test. An I(2) test assessed inconsistencies across studies. I(2)> 50% represented substantial heterogeneity. RESULTS: Four probiotics studies (N=212), 4 prebiotics studies (N=126) were included. Probiotics: There were no significant differences in weight gain (MD 1.96, 95% CI: -2.64 to 6.56, 2 studies, n=34) or in maximal enteral feed (MD 35.20, 95% CI: -7.61 to 78.02, 2 studies, n=34), number of stools per day increased significantly in probiotic group (MD 1.60, 95% CI: 1.20 to 2.00, 1 study, n=20). Prebiotics: Galacto-oligosaccharide / Fructo-oligosaccharide (GOS/FOS) yielded no significant difference in weight gain (MD 0.04, 95% CI: -2.65 to 2.73, 2 studies, n=50), GOS/FOS yielded no significant differences in length gain (MD 0.01, 95% CI: -0.03 to 0.04, 2 studies, n=50). There were no significant differences in head growth (MD −0.01, 95% CI: -0.02 to 0.00, 2 studies, n=76) or age at full enteral feed (MD −0.79, 95% CI: -2.20 to 0.61, 2 studies, n=86). Stool frequency increased significantly in prebiotic group (MD 0.80, 95% CI: 0.48 to 1.1, 2 studies, n=86). GOS/FOS and FOS yielded higher bifidobacteria counts in prebiotics group (MD 2.10, 95% CI: 0.96 to 3.24, n=27) and (MD 0.48, 95% CI: 0.28 to 0.68, n=56). CONCLUSIONS: There is not enough evidence to state that supplementation with probiotics or prebiotics results in improved growth and clinical outcomes in exclusively formula fed preterm infants. BioMed Central 2012-08-28 /pmc/articles/PMC3487753/ /pubmed/22928998 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1475-2891-11-58 Text en Copyright ©2012 Mugambi et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Review
Mugambi, Mary N
Musekiwa, Alfred
Lombard, Martani
Young, Taryn
Blaauw, Reneé
Probiotics, prebiotics infant formula use in preterm or low birth weight infants: a systematic review
title Probiotics, prebiotics infant formula use in preterm or low birth weight infants: a systematic review
title_full Probiotics, prebiotics infant formula use in preterm or low birth weight infants: a systematic review
title_fullStr Probiotics, prebiotics infant formula use in preterm or low birth weight infants: a systematic review
title_full_unstemmed Probiotics, prebiotics infant formula use in preterm or low birth weight infants: a systematic review
title_short Probiotics, prebiotics infant formula use in preterm or low birth weight infants: a systematic review
title_sort probiotics, prebiotics infant formula use in preterm or low birth weight infants: a systematic review
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3487753/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22928998
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1475-2891-11-58
work_keys_str_mv AT mugambimaryn probioticsprebioticsinfantformulauseinpretermorlowbirthweightinfantsasystematicreview
AT musekiwaalfred probioticsprebioticsinfantformulauseinpretermorlowbirthweightinfantsasystematicreview
AT lombardmartani probioticsprebioticsinfantformulauseinpretermorlowbirthweightinfantsasystematicreview
AT youngtaryn probioticsprebioticsinfantformulauseinpretermorlowbirthweightinfantsasystematicreview
AT blaauwrenee probioticsprebioticsinfantformulauseinpretermorlowbirthweightinfantsasystematicreview