4.5 Article

Postnatal Growth Faltering: Growth and Height Improvement at Two Years in Children with Very Low Birth Weight between 2002-2017

Journal

CHILDREN-BASEL
Volume 9, Issue 12, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/children9121800

Keywords

infant premature; very low birth weight; extrauterine growth restriction

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In the last two decades, there has been a decrease in the prevalence of postnatal growth faltering in preterm infants with very low birth weight. There has also been an increase in growth rate during the neonatal period and improvements in height at 2 years of age.
The prevalence of postnatal growth faltering (PGF) in preterm infants with very low birth weight (VLBW) (<1500 g) is a universal problem. Growth improvement is expected as neonatal care is optimized. Objectives: To determine if there has been a decrease in the prevalence of PGF and an improvement in height at 2 years in appropriate for gestational age VLBW children in the last two decades. Methods: Clinical descriptive retrospective analysis of neonatal somatometry at birth and at two-year corrected age in VLBW preterm infants. Small for gestational age were excluded. Two cohorts (2002-2006, n = 112; and 2013-2017, n = 92) were compared. Results. In the second five-year period, a decrease in prevalence of PGF was observed (36.6% vs. 22.8%, p = 0.033), an increase in growth rate in the first 28 days (5.22 (4.35-6.09) g/kg/day vs. 11.38 (10.61-12.15) g/kg/day, p < 0.0001) and an increase in height standard deviation (SD) at 2 years (-1.12 (-1.35--0.91) vs. -0.74 (-0.99--0.49) p = 0.023). Probability of short stature at 2 years was directly related to daily weight gain in the first 28 days. Conclusions: when comparing two five-year periods in the last two decades, growth in VLBW preterm infants has improved, both during neonatal period and at two years of age.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available