4.7 Article

Effects of two different doses of amino acid supplementation on growth and blood amino acid levels in premature neonates admitted to the neonatal intensive care unit: A randomized, controlled trial

期刊

PEDIATRICS
卷 120, 期 6, 页码 1286-1296

出版社

AMER ACAD PEDIATRICS
DOI: 10.1542/peds.2007-0545

关键词

neonates; parenteral nutrition; amino acids; acylcarnitines; nutrition

向作者/读者索取更多资源

OBJECTIVES. The goal was to measure the effects of 2 distinct strategies for parenteral nutrition on neonatal growth and blood amino acid profiles. METHODS. In a multicenter trial (n = 11 sites), we randomly allocated premature (23-29 weeks and 6 days of gestation) neonates to 1 of 2 approaches to intravenous amino acid administration. In one group, amino acid supplementation was started at 1.0 g/kg per day and advanced by 0.5 g/kg per day to a maximum of 2.5 g/kg per day (2.5 g/kg per day group). The other group received amino acids starting at 1.5 g/kg per day and advancing by 1.0 g/kg per day to a maximum of 3.5 g/kg per day (3.5 g/kg per day group). Filter paper blood spots were obtained from each infant on the day of random assignment and on days 7 and 28 of age, to monitor blood amino acid levels. RESULTS. We enrolled 122 neonates (64 in the 3.5 g/kg per day group and 58 in the 2.5 g/kg per day group). There were no differences in demographic or baseline characteristics between the 2 treatment groups. There was no significant difference in growth by day 28 after birth (median weight gain: 12.9 and 11.4 g/kg per day for the 3.5 and 2.5 g/kg per day groups, respectively), and the incidences of secondary morbidities were similar in the 2 groups. On day 7, blood levels of several amino acids and the serum urea nitrogen level were higher in the 3.5 g/kg per day group, compared with the 2.5 g/kg per day group; none of the amino acid levels were lower. CONCLUSIONS. Higher doses of amino acid supplementation did not improve neonatal growth and were associated with increased blood amino acid and urea nitrogen levels.

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