4.1 Article

Human Milk and Infants With Congenital Heart Disease A Summary of Current Literature Supporting the Provision of Human Milk and Breastfeeding

Journal

ADVANCES IN NEONATAL CARE
Volume 19, Issue 3, Pages 212-218

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/ANC.0000000000000582

Keywords

breastfeeding; centrifuge; chylothorax; congenital heart disease; creamatocrit; feeding intolerance; inadequate growth; maternal support; mother's own milk; necrotizing enterocolitis; pasteurized donor human Milk

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Human milk is a life-saving medical intervention. Infants with congenital heart disease are at an increased risk for necrotizing enterocolitis, chylothorax, feeding difficulties, and growth failure. In the absence of evidence-based care, their mothers are also at risk for low milk supply and/or poor breastfeeding outcomes. Purpose: Summarize the role of human milk and clinical outcomes for infants with congenital heart disease (CHD). Summarize methods of ideal breastfeeding support. Methods/Search Strategy: PubMed, Cochrane Library, and CINAHL were the databases used. The terms used for the search related to CHD and necrotizing enterocolitis were human milk and necrotizing enterocolitis and congenital heart disease. This resulted in a total of 17 publications for review. Findings: Infants receiving exclusive human milk diet are at a lower risk for necrotizing enterocolitis and will have improved weight gain. Infants with chylothorax who receive skimmed human milk have higher weight-for-age scores than formula-fed infants. Maternal breastfeeding education correlates with decreased risk of poor breastfeeding outcomes. Implications for Research: Evaluate the role between human milk and the incidence of necrotizing enterocolitis, feeding difficulties, and clinical outcomes in the population of infants with CHD.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available