4.7 Article

Breast-feeding protects against celiac disease

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF CLINICAL NUTRITION
卷 75, 期 5, 页码 914-921

出版社

AMER SOC NUTRITION-ASN
DOI: 10.1093/ajcn/75.5.914

关键词

breast-feeding; case-referent study; celiac disease; childhood; diet; epidemiology; gluten; Sweden; prevention

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Celiac disease, or permanent gluten-sensitive enteropathy, is an immunologic disease strictly dependent on exposure to wheat gluten or related proteins in rye and barley. Objective: The aim of this study was to explore whether breast-feeding and the mode of introducing dietary gluten influence the risk of celiac disease in childhood. Design: A population-based incident case-referent study of Swedish children, 627 cases with celiac disease and 1254 referents. was conducted 78% of the matched sets were included in the final analyses. A questionnaire was used to assess patterns of food introduction to infants. Models were built, based on current epidemiologic and immunologic knowledge of celiac disease, to study the potential influence of dietary patterns on disease risk and were evaluated by conditional logistic regression in multivariate analyses. Results: The risk of celiac disease was reduced in children aged <2 y if they were still being breast-fed when dietary gluten was introduced [adjusted odds ratio (OR): 0.59; 95% CI: 0.42, 0.83]. This effect was even more pronounced in infants who continued to be breast-fed after dietary gluten was introduced (OR: 0.36 95% CI: 0.26, 0.51). The risk was greater when gluten was introduced in the diet in large amounts (OR: 1.5; 95% CI: 1.1, 2.1) than when introduced in small or medium amounts. In older children, these risk factors were of no or only minor importance. Conclusions: The gradual introduction of gluten-containing foods into the diet of infants while they are still being breast-fed reduces the risk of celiac disease in early childhood and probably also during the subsequent childhood period.

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