Effect of iron on neonatal gut flora during the first week of life

Mevissen-Verhage, E. A. E.; Marcelis, J. H.; Amerongen, W. C. M. Harmsen-van; Vos, Nanda; Berkel, J; Verhoef, J.

doi:10.1007/bf02148653

Cited by 30 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…36 Notably, results of cultures were significantly different among the 3 groups as early as 1 week of age. 37 As noted above, human milk contains several prebiotic factors, including a range of oligosaccharides. Lactoferrin, which binds and facilitates the uptake of iron by the enterocyte, 38 is also a prebiotic with important functional characteristics that foster a healthy intestinal microbiome.…”

Section: Mineral-mineral Interactionsmentioning

confidence: 98%

Balancing Benefits and Risks of Iron Fortification in Resource-Rich Countries

Krebs

Domellöf

Ziegler

2015

The Journal of Pediatrics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

or the last 25 years, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) has endorsed the use of iron-fortified infant formulas, noting "no role for the use of low-iron formulas." The rationale for these policies was the recognition that the increase in the use of iron-fortified formulas, accounting for 80% of all formula sold in 1985, was responsible for the declining prevalence of iron-deficiency anemia in US infants. 1 These recommendations were also based on the absence of evidence of discernible adverse effects. Controlled trials had reported no differences in gastrointestinal symptoms, such as colic, constipation, diarrhea, regurgitation, and fussiness, among infants receiving low-iron vs iron-fortified formulas. 2,3 Likewise, evidence was lacking to support another theoretical concern of clinically significant interactions with other micronutrients, specifically zinc and copper. In 1999, the AAP took an even stronger stand and recommended that low iron formulas be removed from the market entirely, 4 for reasons similar to those of the 1989 policy. Further, it was recommended that the minimum iron content for all term infant formulas be at least 4 mg/L. 4 Currently, standard, term infant formulas on the market are all ironfortified and contain 4-12 mg/L of iron, even though there are some regional differences. In the US, the AAP recommends that infant formulas have an iron content of 10-12 mg/L 5 ; in Europe, the European Society for Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition recommends 4-8 mg/L. 6 In the recommendations, the contrast in the iron exposure of formula-fed infants vs breastfed infants has primarily focused on the better bioavailability of the iron in breast milk. Although an absorption efficiency of approximately 50% is often quoted, some studies have actually reported absorption in the range of 12%-16%, 7,8 making that bioavailability distinction much less potent. This also suggests that absorption of substantial amounts of dietary iron simply is not critical during the early months of life in healthy infants of normal birth weight. Among all the compositional differences between human milk and formula, the differences in iron content are the most extreme. Virtually all mammalian milks are low in iron, with the exception of rodents, in which postnatal growth is extremely rapid. It seems implausible that this conserved biological pattern is without purpose. It is also clear that iron deficiency occurs in breastfed infants only after the very early months of life. The practical challenge is to identify when the birth iron endowment is exhausted, at which point the infant needs a source of iron from the diet. This article will discuss the potential advantages of a low iron intake for the infant and the potential adverse effects of drastically altering this, especially in the first 6 months of life. From the outset, two realities must be acknowledged. First, iron deficiency (especially without anemia) in infants remains common, particularly in high-risk groups, including older normal breastfed i...

show abstract

Section: Mineral-mineral Interactionsmentioning

confidence: 98%

Balancing Benefits and Risks of Iron Fortification in Resource-Rich Countries

Krebs

Domellöf

Ziegler

2015

The Journal of Pediatrics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It can be argued that the body iron content at term birth of most infants is sufficient to support haematopoiesis until about 4 months of age (Dallman, 1986;Aggett et al 1989). Another argument against the initial fortification of formula with iron is that omission of iron gives a faecal flora somewhat closer to breast milk (Mevissen-Verhage et al 1985;Balmer & Wharton, 1991). The impression that low iron formulas are associated with fewer gastrointestinal side effects is not supported by controlled studies (Oski, 1980;Nelson et al 1988).…”

Section: Minerals a N D Trace Elementsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Composition of Human Milk as a Model for the Design of Infant Formulas: Recent Findings and Possible Applications

Goedhart

Bindels

1994

Nutr. Res. Rev.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Using culture methods, infants given an Fe‐fortified cow's milk preparation had lower isolation frequencies of bifidobacteria but higher counts of Bacteroides spp. and Escherichia coli than children receiving an unfortified cow's milk preparation (Mevissen‐Verhage et al ., ,b). Zimmermann et al .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Low iron availability in continuousin vitrocolonic fermentations induces strong dysbiosis of the child gut microbial consortium and a decrease in main metabolites

Dostal

Fehlbaum

Chassard

et al. 2012

FEMS Microbiol Ecol

106

131

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Iron (Fe) deficiency affects an estimated 2 billion people worldwide, and Fe supplements are a common corrective strategy. The impact of Fe deficiency and Fe supplementation on the complex microbial community of the child gut was studied using in vitro colonic fermentation models inoculated with immobilized fecal microbiota. Chyme media (all Fe chelated by 2,2′‐dipyridyl to 26.5 mg Fe L−1) mimicking Fe deficiency and supplementation were continuously fermented. Fermentation effluent samples were analyzed daily on the microbial composition and metabolites by quantitative PCR, 16S rRNA gene 454‐pyrosequencing, and HPLC. Low Fe conditions (1.56 mg Fe L−1) significantly decreased acetate concentrations, and subsequent Fe supplementation (26.5 mg Fe L−1) restored acetate production. High Fe following normal Fe conditions had no impact on the gut microbiota composition and metabolic activity. During very low Fe conditions (0.9 mg Fe L−1 or Fe chelated by 2,2′‐dipyridyl), a decrease in Roseburia spp./Eubacterium rectale, Clostridium Cluster IV members and Bacteroides spp. was observed, while Lactobacillus spp. and Enterobacteriaceae increased consistent with a decrease in butyrate (−84%) and propionate (−55%). The strong dysbiosis of the gut microbiota together with decrease in main gut microbiota metabolites observed with very low iron conditions could weaken the barrier effect of the microbiota and negatively impact gut health.

show abstract

Effect of iron on neonatal gut flora during the first week of life

Cited by 30 publications

References 22 publications

Balancing Benefits and Risks of Iron Fortification in Resource-Rich Countries

Balancing Benefits and Risks of Iron Fortification in Resource-Rich Countries

The Composition of Human Milk as a Model for the Design of Infant Formulas: Recent Findings and Possible Applications

Low iron availability in continuousin vitrocolonic fermentations induces strong dysbiosis of the child gut microbial consortium and a decrease in main metabolites

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About