Objective To investigate the impact of breast milk (BM) intake on body composition at term in very preterm infants.
Design Preplanned secondary analysis of the Nutritional Evaluation and Optimisation in Neonates Study, a 2-by-2 factorial randomised controlled trial of preterm parenteral nutrition (PN).
Setting Four National Health Service hospitals in London and South-East England.
Patients Infants born at <31 weeks of gestation; infants with life-threatening congenital abnormalities and those unable to receive trial PN within 24 hours of birth were ineligible. 133 infants survived and underwent whole-body MRI at term (37–44 weeks postmenstrual age).
Main outcome measures Non-adipose tissue mass (non-ATM), ATM and ATM as a percentage of body weight (% ATM) at term.
Results Compared with the exclusively BM group (proportion of BM=100% milk, n=56), predominantly formula-fed infants (BM ≤50%, n=38) weighed 283.6 g (95% CI 121.6 to 445.6) more, had 257.4 g (139.1–375.7) more non-ATM and a greater positive weight Z-score change between birth and term. There were no significant differences in weight, non-ATM and weight Z-score change between the exclusively and predominantly BM (BM 51%–99%, n=39) groups. Compared with the exclusively BM group no significant differences were observed in ATM and %ATM in the predominantly BM and predominantly formula-fed groups.
Conclusions The slower weight gain of preterm infants fed BM appears to be due to a deficit in non-ATM and may reflect lower protein intake. Whether this pattern persists into childhood, is altered by BM fortification or later diet, or relates to functional outcomes, are important research questions.
Clinical trial registration ISRCTN29665319, post results.
- infant feeding
- body composition
Statistics from Altmetric.com
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.
Contributors YL, XL, NM and SU conceptualised and designed the study. XL and SU collected data. XL and YL performed the statistical analysis. YL, XL and SU drafted the initial manuscript. YL, XL, NM and SU critically reviewed and revised the manuscript. All authors approved the final manuscript as submitted.
Funding The NEON trial was funded by the Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation (EME) programme of the National Institute of Health Research (project number 08/99/04).
Competing interests SU has received funding from the National Institute of Health Research and the Department of Health, UK and received speaker honoraria for an educational meeting held by Kabi Fresenius. NM in the last 5 years has received consultancy fees from Ferring Pharmaceuticals, speaker honorarium for an educational meeting funded by Nestle International in which they had no organisational involvement and grants from the National Institute of Heath Research, British Heart Foundation, Westminster Children’s Trust Fund, NHS England and Bliss.
Patient consent Not required.
Ethics approval The NEON trial was approved by the UK National Research Ethics Service.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.
Correction notice This paper has been amended since it was published Online First. Table 2 was missing the † symbol after ‘Multivariable*’ on the third line after ATM(g). Also under Contributors and Competing interests, the author initials are ‘SU' and not ‘SNU’.