4.6 Article

Long-term follow-up of babies exposed to azathioprine in utero and via breastfeeding

期刊

JOURNAL OF CROHNS & COLITIS
卷 5, 期 2, 页码 95-100

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1016/j.crohns.2010.10.005

关键词

Crohn's disease; Ulcerative colitis; Azathioprine; Breastfeeding; Infections

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Recommendations on breastfeeding under thiopurines are inconsistent due to limited data. Aim: To assess the risk of infections in offspring breastfed by mothers receiving azathioprine (AZA) for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Methods: Babies, who were breastfed from their mothers treated either with or without AZA were included from a local pregnancy-registry. Women were asked by structured personal interview on general development, infections, hospitalisations and vaccinations of their offspring. Results: A group of 11 mothers taking AZA (median 150 mg/d) during pregnancy and lactation and another of 12 patients without using any immunosuppressive therapy breastfed 15 babies each for median 6 months and 8 months, respectively. Median age of children at time of interview was 3.3 and 4.7 years, respectively. All offspring showed age-appropriate mental and physical development. Infections were commonly seen childhood diseases. Similar rates were observed for most of the various infections between offspring with and without azathioprine exposure during breastfeeding. However, common cold more than two episodes/year and conjunctivitis were numerically more often reported in the group without AZA exposure. In an exploratory analysis no difference in the rate of hospitalisations was seen between exposed (0.06 hospitalisations/patient year) versus non-exposed children (0.12 hospitalisations/patient year, p=0.8) Conclusion: Our study which reports the largest number of babies breastfed with exposure to AZA suggests that breastfeeding does not increase the risk of infections. (C) 2010 European Crohn's and Colitis Organisation. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据