4.7 Article

Simulated In Vitro Infant Gastrointestinal Digestion of Infant Formulas Containing Different Fat Sources and Human Milk: Differences in Lipid Profiling and Free Fatty Acid Release

Journal

JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURAL AND FOOD CHEMISTRY
Volume 69, Issue 24, Pages 6799-6809

Publisher

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acs.jafc.1c01760

Keywords

human milk; infant formula; in vitro gastrointestinal lipolysis; lipid profiling; free fatty acid

Funding

  1. Major projects in dairy products and meat processing technology [2019ZX07B01]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study analyzed and compared the simulated in vitro digestion of human milk and infant formulas with different fat sources. Human milk exhibited higher lipolysis levels, while infant formulas showed higher hydrolysis efficiency. This research could potentially help in formulating infant formulas that are closer to human milk.
Simulated in vitro infant gastrointestinal digestion of human milk and four infant formulas containing different fat sources was analyzed and compared in this study. Although there are disadvantages brought about by its larger droplet size than infant formulas, human milk exhibited a higher lipolysis level due to the presence of MFGM interfacial layers. Higher hydrolysis efficiency of infant formulas (IFB, IFC, and IFM) was due to the presence of MFGM/phospholipid-enriched materials. Human milk released higher free fatty acid levels, especially long-chain fatty acid, and less undigested TAG molecules at the end of digestion than infant formulas. Human milk had a higher proportion of MAG and DAG linked to long-chain fatty acid. Furthermore, several lipids were identified as potential biomarkers that could be used to further analyze differences in the biological properties of human, bovine, and caprine milk. This comprehensive analysis might be fruitful to formulate an infant formula closest to human milk.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available