AIM:To investigate the effect of a new infant formula supplemented with a low level (0.24 g/100 mL) of galacto-oligosaccharide (GOS) on intestinal micro-flora (Bifidobacteria , Lactobacilli and E. coli ) and fermentation characteristics in term infants, compared with human milk and a standard infant formula without GOS. METHODS: Term infants (n = 371) were approached in this study in three hospitals of China. All infants started breast-feeding. Those who changed to formula-feeding within 4 wk after birth were randomly assigned to one of the two formula groups. Growth and stool characteristics, and side effects that occurred in recruited infants were recorded in a 3-mo follow-up period. Fecal samples were collected from a subpopulation of recruited infants for analysis of intestinal bacteria (culture technique), acetic acid (gas chromatography) and pH (indicator strip).
RESULTS:After 3 mo, the intestinal Bifidobacteria , Lactobacilli , acetic acid and stool frequency were significantly increased, and fecal pH was decreased in infants fed with the GOS-formula or human milk, compared with those fed with the formula without GOS. No significant differences were observed between the GOS formula and human milk groups. Supplementation with GOS did not influence the incidence of crying, regurgitation and vomiting. CONCLUSION: A low level of GOS (0.24 g/100 mL) in infant formula can improve stool frequency, decrease fecal pH, and stimulate intestinal Bifidobacteria and Lactobacilli as in those fed with human milk.
Background
Infants with rule-out infections are responsible for the majority of empirical antibiotics treatment (EAT) in neonatal intensive care units (NICUs), particularly very preterm infants (VPIs). Antibiotic overuse has been linked to adverse outcomes. There is a paucity of data on the association between EAT and clinical outcomes (containing the nutritional outcomes) of VPIs without infection-related morbidities.
Methods
Clinical data of VPIs admitted in 28 hospitals in 20 provinces of China from September 2019 to December 2020 were collected. EAT of VPIs was calculated as the number of days with initial usage in the first week after birth, and then categorized into 3 groups (antibiotic exposure: none, 1-4 days, and > 4 days). Clinical characteristics, nutritional status , and the short-term clinical outcomes among 3 groups were compared and analyzed.
Results
In total, 1834 VPIs without infection-related morbidities in the first postnatal week were enrolled, including 152 cases (8.3%) without antibiotics, 374 cases (20.4%) with EAT ≤4 days and 1308 cases (71.3%) with EAT > 4 days. After adjusting for the confounding variables, longer duration of EAT was associated with decreased weight growth velocity and increased duration of reach of full enteral feeding in EAT > 4 days group (aβ: -4.83, 95% CI: − 6.12 ~ − 3.53; aβ: 2.77, 95% CI: 0.25 ~ 5.87, respectively) than those receiving no antibiotics. In addition, the risk of feeding intolerance (FI) in EAT > 4 days group was 4 times higher than that in non-antibiotic group (aOR: 4.14, 95%CI: 1.49 ~ 13.56) and 1.8 times higher than that in EAT ≤4 days group (aOR: 1.82, 95%CI: 1.08 ~ 3.17). EAT > 4 days was also a risk factor for greater than or equal to stage 2 necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC) than those who did not receive antibiotics (aOR: 7.68, 95%CI: 1.14 ~ 54.75) and those who received EAT ≤4 days antibiotics (aOR: 5.42, 95%CI: 1.94 ~ 14.80).
Conclusions
The EAT rate among uninfected VPIs was high in Chinese NICUs. Prolonged antibiotic exposure was associated with decreased weight growth velocity, longer duration of reach of full enteral feeding, increased risk of feeding intolerance and NEC ≥ stage 2. Future stewardship interventions to reduce EAT use should be designed and implemented.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.