Cargando…

Continuous feeding versus intermittent bolus feeding for premature infants with low birth weight: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Clinical risks and advantages of both continuous feeding and intermittent feeding for preterm infants have been presented in previous studies. To determine the most appropriate feeding method for low-birth-weight infants, a meta-analysis was conducted. SUBJECTS/METHODS: Articl...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Wang, Yan, Zhu, Wei, Luo, Bi-ru
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Nature Publishing Group UK 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7222868/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31659243
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41430-019-0522-x
_version_ 1783533668450435072
author Wang, Yan
Zhu, Wei
Luo, Bi-ru
author_facet Wang, Yan
Zhu, Wei
Luo, Bi-ru
author_sort Wang, Yan
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Clinical risks and advantages of both continuous feeding and intermittent feeding for preterm infants have been presented in previous studies. To determine the most appropriate feeding method for low-birth-weight infants, a meta-analysis was conducted. SUBJECTS/METHODS: Articles related to this topic were searched in PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library electronic database from the onset to May 2019. Heterogeneity analysis was performed with Chi-square and I(2) test. Pooled analysis was based on fixed effects model, if heterogeneity between the eligible studies was negligible (I(2) < 50%, P > 0.05). In contrast, a random effects model was carried out. The quality of including studies were evaluated by Cochrane assessment tool. RESULTS: A total of 1030 articles identified. Altogether, eight articles including 707 infants were included in final analysis based on eligibility criteria. In continuous feeding infants, time to achieving full feeds was longer (weight mean difference 0.98 (95% CI 0.26–1.71, P = 0.008) days) compared with intermittent feeding infants. Pooled analysis indicated there were no significant difference in other variables such as feeding intolerance, duration of hospitalization, days to regain birth weight, days to first successful oral feeding, duration of parenteral feeding, weight growth, length increment, head circumference growth, proven necrotizing enterocolitis, and probable necrotizing enterocolitis. In subgroup analysis for birth weight (<1000 g and >1000 g), we did not identify significant difference in time to full feeds, time to regain birth weight, and duration of hospitalization. CONCLUSIONS: Intermittent feeding may be more beneficial for low-birth weight infants, However, well-designed studies and evidenced-based clinical practice are required to determine the most appropriate feeding method for premature infants with low birth weight.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7222868
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Nature Publishing Group UK
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-72228682020-05-15 Continuous feeding versus intermittent bolus feeding for premature infants with low birth weight: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials Wang, Yan Zhu, Wei Luo, Bi-ru Eur J Clin Nutr Article BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Clinical risks and advantages of both continuous feeding and intermittent feeding for preterm infants have been presented in previous studies. To determine the most appropriate feeding method for low-birth-weight infants, a meta-analysis was conducted. SUBJECTS/METHODS: Articles related to this topic were searched in PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library electronic database from the onset to May 2019. Heterogeneity analysis was performed with Chi-square and I(2) test. Pooled analysis was based on fixed effects model, if heterogeneity between the eligible studies was negligible (I(2) < 50%, P > 0.05). In contrast, a random effects model was carried out. The quality of including studies were evaluated by Cochrane assessment tool. RESULTS: A total of 1030 articles identified. Altogether, eight articles including 707 infants were included in final analysis based on eligibility criteria. In continuous feeding infants, time to achieving full feeds was longer (weight mean difference 0.98 (95% CI 0.26–1.71, P = 0.008) days) compared with intermittent feeding infants. Pooled analysis indicated there were no significant difference in other variables such as feeding intolerance, duration of hospitalization, days to regain birth weight, days to first successful oral feeding, duration of parenteral feeding, weight growth, length increment, head circumference growth, proven necrotizing enterocolitis, and probable necrotizing enterocolitis. In subgroup analysis for birth weight (<1000 g and >1000 g), we did not identify significant difference in time to full feeds, time to regain birth weight, and duration of hospitalization. CONCLUSIONS: Intermittent feeding may be more beneficial for low-birth weight infants, However, well-designed studies and evidenced-based clinical practice are required to determine the most appropriate feeding method for premature infants with low birth weight. Nature Publishing Group UK 2019-10-28 2020 /pmc/articles/PMC7222868/ /pubmed/31659243 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41430-019-0522-x Text en © The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Limited 2019 This article is made available via the PMC Open Access Subset for unrestricted research re-use and secondary analysis in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for the duration of the World Health Organization (WHO) declaration of COVID-19 as a global pandemic.
spellingShingle Article
Wang, Yan
Zhu, Wei
Luo, Bi-ru
Continuous feeding versus intermittent bolus feeding for premature infants with low birth weight: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
title Continuous feeding versus intermittent bolus feeding for premature infants with low birth weight: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
title_full Continuous feeding versus intermittent bolus feeding for premature infants with low birth weight: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
title_fullStr Continuous feeding versus intermittent bolus feeding for premature infants with low birth weight: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
title_full_unstemmed Continuous feeding versus intermittent bolus feeding for premature infants with low birth weight: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
title_short Continuous feeding versus intermittent bolus feeding for premature infants with low birth weight: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
title_sort continuous feeding versus intermittent bolus feeding for premature infants with low birth weight: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7222868/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31659243
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41430-019-0522-x
work_keys_str_mv AT wangyan continuousfeedingversusintermittentbolusfeedingforprematureinfantswithlowbirthweightametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT zhuwei continuousfeedingversusintermittentbolusfeedingforprematureinfantswithlowbirthweightametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT luobiru continuousfeedingversusintermittentbolusfeedingforprematureinfantswithlowbirthweightametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials