4.5 Article

Tolerance to early human milk feeding is not compromised by indomethacin in preterm infants with persistent ductus arteriosus

期刊

ACTA PAEDIATRICA
卷 92, 期 9, 页码 1074-1078

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS AS
DOI: 10.1080/08035250310004225

关键词

feeding; gastric residuals; indomethacin; persistent ductus arteriosus; tolerance

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Aim: Early human milk feeding is beneficial for gut and brain development. Persistent ductus arteriosus (PDA) and indomethacin may compromise enteral function in preterm infants. For many years enteral milk feedings have continued in preterm infants receiving indomethacin for PDA. The aim of this study was to investigate whether this strategy is efficient in terms of risks and tolerance to early enteral feeding. Methods: This retrospective study included 64 inborn infants of <29 wk gestational age (GA), 32 infants who received indomethacin for symptomatic PDA (case infants) and 32 matched controls. Case infants had a mean (SD) GA of 26.3 wk (1.3) and body weight 839 g (203) versus controls GA 26.4 wk (1.2) and body weight 896 g (213) ( p = 0.82 and 0.27, respectively). Case infants had higher respiratory morbidity; 90.6% versus 50% of controls needed mechanical ventilation ( p = 0.000). Results: Case infants received human milk from a median (range) age of 4.0 h (1.5-27.5), and controls from 5.3 h (2.0-38.0) ( p = 0.092). The first dose of indomethacin was given at a mean age of 1.7 d (1.0). There were no differences between the two groups in feeding volumes or gastric residuals on days 1 to 7. Mean (SD) feeding volume on day 7 was 64 ml/kg (31) in case infants and 76 ml/kg (30) in controls ( p = 0.23). Four infants developed necrotizing enterocolitis: two case infants and two controls ( p = 1.00). Conclusion: Early enteral feeding with human milk, starting within the first hours of life, seems to be as well tolerated in preterm infants treated with indomethacin for PDA as in their matched controls.

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

4.5
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