4.7 Article

High-Dose Docosahexaenoic Acid Supplementation of Preterm Infants: Respiratory and Allergy Outcomes

期刊

PEDIATRICS
卷 128, 期 1, 页码 E71-E77

出版社

AMER ACAD PEDIATRICS
DOI: 10.1542/peds.2010-2405

关键词

docosahexaenoic acid; allergy; respiratory; premature infants

资金

  1. National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia [250322]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

BACKGROUND: Docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) has been associated with downregulation of inflammatory responses. OBJECTIVE: To report the effect of DHA supplementation on long-term atopic and respiratory outcomes in preterm infants. METHODS: This study is a multicenter, randomized controlled trial comparing the outcomes for preterm infants <33 weeks' gestation who consumed expressed breast milk from mothers taking either tuna oil (high-DHA diet) or soy oil (standard-DHA) capsules. Data collected included incidence of bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD) and parental reporting of atopic conditions over the first 18 months of life. RESULTS: Six hundred fifty-seven infants were enrolled (322 to high-DHA diet, 335 to standard), and 93.5% completed the 18-month follow-up. There was a reduction in BPD in boys (relative risk [RR]: 0.67 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.47-0.96]; P = .03) and in all infants with a birth weight of <1250 g (RR: 0.75 [95% CI: 0.57-0.98]; P = .04). There was no effect on duration of respiratory support, admission length, or home oxygen requirement. There was a reduction in reported hay fever in all infants in the high-DHA group at either 12 or 18 months (RR: 0.41 [95% CI: 0.18-0.91]; P = .03) and at either 12 or 18 months in boys (RR: 0.15 [0.03-0.64]; P = .01). There was no effect on asthma, eczema, or food allergy. CONCLUSIONS: DHA supplementation for infants of <33 weeks' gestation reduced the incidence of BPD in boys and in all infants with a birth weight of <1250 g and reduced the incidence of reported hay fever in boys at either 12 or 18 months. Pediatrics 2011;128:e71-e77

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

4.7
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