Breastfeeding the Infant With Cleft Lip and Palate

Donovan, Kathleen

doi:10.1177/1941406412447237

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 17 publications

(61 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Forty-three studies were excluded due to the following reasons: 12 included individuals whose CL/P was associated with some craniofacial syndrome or malformation [26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35][36][37] ; 4 evaluated types of feeding devices (e.g., feeding nipples and cups) [38][39][40][41] ; 14 did not report data on BF [42][43][44][45][46][47][48][49][50][51][52][53][54][55] ; 4 evaluated BF only during specific periods (e.g., hospitalizations and after repair surgeries) [56][57][58][59] ; and 9 had study designs other than observational, [60][61][62][63][64][65][66][67][68] thus resulting in 29 studies. The complete process of study identification and selection is presented in Figure 1.…”

Section: Study Selectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Breastfeeding and Cleft Lip and Palate: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Oliveira

Fonseca-Souza

Rolim

et al. 2023

The Cleft Palate Craniofacial Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective To evaluate the association between cleft lip and/or cleft palate (CL/P) and breastfeeding (BF). Design A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed based on studies published in PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, LILACS, BBO, and Embase databases, and in the gray literature. The search occurred in September 2021 and was updated in March 2022. Observational studies evaluating the association between BF and CL/P were included. Risk of bias was analyzed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. A random-effects meta-analysis was conducted. Certainty of evidence was evaluated using the GRADE approach. Main Outcome Measure(s) Frequency of BF in relation to the presence or absence of CL/P, as well as to the type of CL/P. The association between cleft type and BF challenges was also evaluated. Results From a total of 6863 studies identified, 29 were included in the qualitative review. Risk of bias was moderate and high in most studies (n = 26). There was a significant association between the presence of CL/P and absence of BF (OR = 18.08; 95% CI 7.09–46.09). Individuals with cleft palate with or without cleft lip (CP ± L) had a significantly lower frequency of BF (OR = 5.93; 95% CI 4.30–8.16) and a significantly higher frequency of BF challenges (OR = 13.55; 95% CI 4.91–37.43) compared to individuals with CL. Certainty of the evidence was low or very low in all analyses. Conclusion The presence of clefts, especially those with palate involvement, is associated with higher chances of absence of BF.

show abstract

Section: Study Selectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Breastfeeding and Cleft Lip and Palate: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Oliveira

Fonseca-Souza

Rolim

et al. 2023

The Cleft Palate Craniofacial Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Perinatal Management of Pregnancies with Fetal Congenital Anomalies: A Guide to Obstetricians and Pediatricians

Mangla

Anne

2024

CPR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Congenital anomalies are responsible for approximately 20% of all neonatal deaths worldwide. Improvements in antenatal screening and diagnosis have significantly improved the prenatal detection of birth defects; however, these improvements have not translated into the improved neonatal prognosis of babies born with congenital anomalies. Objectives: An attempt has been made to summarise the prenatal interventions, if available, the optimal route, mode and time of delivery and discuss the minimum delivery room preparations that should be made if expecting to deliver a fetus with a congenital anomaly. Methods: The recent literature related to the perinatal management of the fetus with prenatally detected common congenital anomalies were searched in English peer-reviewed journals from the PubMed database, to work out an evidence-based approach for their management. Results: Fetuses with prenatally detected congenital anomalies should be delivered at a tertiary care centre with facilities for neonatal surgery and paediatric intensive care if needed. There is no indication for preterm delivery in the majority of cases. Only a few congenital malformations, like high-risk sacrococcygeal teratoma, congenital lung masses with significant fetal compromise, fetal cerebral lesions or neural tube defects with Head circumference >40 cm or the biparietal diameter is ≥12 cm, gastroschisis with extracorporeal liver, or giant omphaloceles in the fetus warrant caesarean section as the primary mode of delivery. Conclusion: The prognosis of a fetus with congenital anomalies can be significantly improved if planning for delivery, including the Place and Time of delivery, is done optimally. A multi-disciplinary team should be available for the fetus to optimize conditions right from when it is born.

show abstract

Breastfeeding the Infant With Cleft Lip and Palate

Cited by 2 publications

References 17 publications

Breastfeeding and Cleft Lip and Palate: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Breastfeeding and Cleft Lip and Palate: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Perinatal Management of Pregnancies with Fetal Congenital Anomalies: A Guide to Obstetricians and Pediatricians

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About