Next Article in Journal
Anti-Obesity Effects of Petasites japonicus (Meowi) Ethanol Extract on RAW 264.7 Macrophages and 3T3-L1 Adipocytes and Its Characterization of Polyphenolic Compounds
Next Article in Special Issue
Complementary Feeding in Preterm Infants: A Systematic Review
Previous Article in Journal
Got Mylk? The Emerging Role of Australian Plant-Based Milk Alternatives as A Cow’s Milk Substitute
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Editorial

Complementary Feeding in Preterm Infants: Where Do We Stand?

by
Maria Elisabetta Baldassarre
1,*,
Maria Lorella Giannì
2,3,
Antonio Di Mauro
1,
Fabio Mosca
2,3,4 and
Nicola Laforgia
1
1
Department of Biomedical Science and Human Oncology, Section of Neonatology and NICU, University “Aldo Moro”, 70100 Bari, Italy
2
Fondazione IRCCS Ca’ Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, NICU, Via Commenda 12, 20122 Milan, Italy
3
Department of Clinical Sciences and Community Health, University of Milan, Via Commenda 19, 20122 Milan, Italy
4
Italian Society of Neonatology, Corso Venezia 8, 20121 Milan, Italy
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Submission received: 22 April 2020 / Accepted: 26 April 2020 / Published: 29 April 2020
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Complementary Feeding in Preterm Newborns)
Currently, about 15 million preterm births occur annually worldwide; over 500,000 in Europe and 32,000 in Italy, accounting for 7–11% of total births, with the highest incidence in low-income states. Most babies are born before 32 weeks of gestation, whereas 1.58% are born earlier [1].
Great effort has been made to decrease the burden of mortality and morbidity of prematurity [2]. Preterm infants experience the impaired development of the structure and function of key organs and systems due to the interruption of the physiological intrauterine organogenesis with consequent exposure to the extrauterine environment at a time when organ plasticity is exceptionally high. Preterm infants are at increased risk of adverse health outcomes, further exacerbated by the frequent association of different co-morbidities [2,3,4].
Early nutrition and growth are key contributors to the modulation of both short and long-term infant health outcomes [5]. Preterm infants have different nutritional needs to their term peers in terms of energy, macronutrients and micronutrients intake [6]. Besides, they frequently develop significant postnatal growth retardation [7] with altered body composition [8,9]. Preterm infants develop a relative reduction in fat free mass with increased adiposity, which, respectively, may contribute to adverse neuro and metabolic outcomes [8,9,10,11]. Accordingly, both the prevention and recovery of any nutritional deficits accounting for growth pattern and body composition alterations should be a priority for the nutritional care of infants born preterm.
The introduction of solid foods (thereafter referred to as weaning) is associated with major changes in both macronutrients and micronutrients intake, with the risk of nutritional deficits or excesses for infants undergoing a rapid growth and development during this period of life [12]. Yet, surprisingly, relatively little attention has been paid to defining both the ideal age and the detailed content of weaning and to their future possible effects on later health and development [13]. No evidence-based guidelines are available regarding the most appropriate time and method of weaning preterm infants—a much-debated issue, partly because of the postnatal cumulative nutritional deficits reported in this very vulnerable population [14].
In 1974 and 1980, the English Department of Health suggested that “few infants should require solids before 3 months and most by 6 months” [15,16]. Then, in 1994, the Committee on Medical Aspects of Food and Nutrition Policy recommended the introduction of solid foods between 5 and 8 months of age, but the individual differences among infants, in terms of either acquired development milestones or specific nutritional needs, were not evaluated [17]. The Joint Consensus Statement on weaning of preterm infants in 2008 suggested “preterm infants should be considered for weaning between 5 and 8 months of uncorrected age to ensure that sensitive periods for the acceptance of solids are not missed and to allow development of appropriate feeding skills” [18]. In 2012, Palmer and Makrides, on the basis of limited available evidence, concluded that starting weaning at three months of corrected age could be appropriate for the majority of preterm infants, including those of lowest gestational ages [19]. Moreover, weaning too early (before 16 weeks of chronological age) may cause an increased risk of allergy and anemia whereas a delayed weaning (after 7 to 10 months of chronological age) may lead to the development of avoidance feeding behavior [19]. Norris et al. evaluated current infant feeding practices among caregivers of preterm infants: two hundred fifty-three infants born preterm were recruited in southeast England over a 2-year period [20]. They reported that the introduction of solid foods varied widely, and that compliance with the few existing general recommendations on weaning was poor [20]. In accordance with these findings, an Italian study demonstrated that, in the absence of a general consensus, primary-care pediatricians have very different approaches to the weaning of healthy preterm infants [21].
Although the early introduction of weaning foods has been suggested for promoting weight gain and recovery of nutritional deficits [22], there is general concern regarding the association between weight gain and the increased risk of obesity and metabolic syndrome later in life [23]. Previous studies have reported inconsistent findings regarding the relationship between the start of weaning and growth, probably because preterm infants of different gestational ages and birth weights were included. In a blinded randomized clinical trial including preterm infants <37 weeks of gestation, Marriot et al. found, in infants weaned at 14.9 weeks postnatal age (intervention group) compared to infants weaned at 17.8 weeks postnatal age (control group), between term and 12 months of corrected age, a greater increase in length growth velocity and higher mean hemoglobin and serum iron levels at 6 months of corrected age [24]. Spiegler et al., in a prospective cohort study, reported that at two years of corrected age, a positive effect of the early introduction of complementary foods on length and weight: very low birth weight infants were on average ~0.4 cm taller (95% CI −0.1 to −0.6) and 100 g heavier (95% CI −0.02 to −0.2) for each month of earlier introduction of complementary food [25]. A positive association between weaning before four months of corrected age and weight gain at 18 to 24 months of corrected age, in very preterm infants born with a gestational age <32 weeks, was reported by Rodriguez et al. [26]. Instead, Gupta et al. reported similar growth parameters at 12 months of corrected age in preterm infants (<34 weeks of gestation) randomized to start weaning either at 4 or 6 months of corrected age [27]. They have also investigated motor and mental development, lipid profile, insulin resistance, blood pressure and serum ferritin showing no differences among groups. However, it must be considered the work of Gupta et al. was conducted in a low-income country and, as a result, their findings may not be applicable to different situations [27]. Morgan et al. evaluated two trials of preterm infants (<37 weeks of gestational age), weaned either early (≤12 weeks) or late (>12 weeks), reporting comparable growth rates between 3 and 9 months post-term; moreover, the attained weight and length at 18 months post-term did not differ between both groups [28]. A systematic review of five studies was not able to perform a meta-analysis, because the outcomes evaluated were not comparable [14]. Two studies evaluated body mass index (BMI): one did not report any significant difference of BMI index Z-score at 1 year between early- and late-weaned infants [27], whereas the other study concluded that, at 1 year of age, the risk of higher BMI was lower when weaning started ≤4 months of age [29]. Morgan et al. found a greater gain in the subscapular skinfold thickness between 3 and 9 months post-term in the early weaned group (before 12 weeks post term) [28]. At the moment, no clear conclusion can be drawn on the relationship between weaning and infants’ later risk of overweight and obesity.

Conclusions

The increased nutritional needs of preterm infants should be adequately met for storage and to maintain and support catch-up growth during the first year of life [11]. The lack of scientific evidence regarding the optimal age and content of weaning result in different, sometime conflicting, indications by caregivers, often leaving parents and caregivers alone and confused. According to the available data, there is no definite positive effect of early weaning on infant growth and nutritional outcomes, but, at the same time, early weaning seems to not be associated with an increased risk of overweight/obesity later in life.

Author Contributions

M.E.B. and M.L.G. conceived of the presented idea. M.E.B. performed the literature search and drafted the manuscript with support from A.D.M. and M.L.G.; F.M. and N.L. reviewed and revised the manuscript. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Purisch, S.E.; Gyamfi-Bannerman, C. Epidemiology of preterm birth. Semin. Perinatol. 2017, 41, 387–391. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Harrison, M.S.; Goldenberg, R.L. Global burden of prematurity. Semin. Fetal. Neonatal. Med. 2016, 21, 74–79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Chehade, H.; Simeoni, U.; Guignard, J.P.; Boubred, F. Preterm Birth: Long Term Cardiovascular and Renal Consequences. Curr. Pediatr. Rev. 2018, 14, 219–226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  4. Synnes, A.; Hicks, M. Neurodevelopmental Outcomes of Preterm Children at School Age and Beyond. Clin. Perinatol. 2018, 45, 393–408. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Haschke, F.; Binder, C.; Huber-Dangl, M.; Haiden, N. Early-Life Nutrition, Growth Trajectories, and Long-Term Outcome. Nestle Nutr. Inst. Workshop Ser. 2019, 90, 107–120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Riskin, A. Meeting the nutritional needs of premature babies: Their future is on our hands. Br. J. Hosp. Med. (Lond.) 2017, 78, 690–694. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Cooke, R.J. Improving growth in preterm infants during initial hospital stay: Principles into practice. Arch. Dis. Child. Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2016, 101, F366–F370. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Roggero, P.; Giannì, M.L.; Amato, O.; Orsi, A.; Piemontese, P.; Morlacchi, L.; Mosca, F. Is term newborn body composition being achieved postnatally in preterm infants? Early Hum. Dev. 2009, 85, 349–352. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Giannì, M.L.; Roggero, P.; Liotto, N.; Taroni, F.; Polimeni, A.; Morlacchi, L.; Piemontese, P.; Consonni, D.; Mosca, F. Body composition in late preterm infants according to percentile at birth. Pediatr. Res. 2016, 79, 710–715. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  10. Ramel, S.E.; Gray, H.L.; Christiansen, E.; Boys, C.; Georgieff, M.K.; Demerath, E.W. Greater Early Gains in Fat-Free Mass, but Not Fat Mass, Are Associated with Improved Neurodevelopment at 1 Year Corrected Age for Prematurity in Very Low Birth Weight Preterm Infants. J. Pediatr. 2016, 173, 108–115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Parlapani, E.; Agakidis, C.; Karagiozoglou-Lampoudi, T. Anthropometry and Body Composition of Preterm Neonates in the Light of MetabolicProgramming. J. Am. Coll. Nutr. 2018, 37, 350–359. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Fewtrell, M.S.; Bronsky, J.; Campoy, C.; Domellöf, M.; Embleton, N.; Fidler Mis, N.; Hojsak, I.; Hulst, J.M.; Indrio, F.; Lapillonne, A.; et al. Complementary Feeding: A Position Paper by the European Society for Paediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition (ESPGHAN) Committee on Nutrition. J. Pediatr. Gastroenterol. Nutr. 2017, 64, 119–132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Fewtrell, M.S. Can Optimal Complementary Feeding Improve Later Health and Development? Nestle Nutr. Inst. Workshop Ser. 2016, 85, 113–123. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  14. Vissers, K.M.; Feskens, E.J.M.; van Goudoever, J.B.; Janse, A.J. The Timing of Initiating Complementary Feeding in Preterm Infants and Its Effect on Overweight: A Systematic Review. Ann. Nutr Metab. 2018, 72, 307–315. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. DHSS (Department of Health and Social Security). Present Day Practice in Infant Feeding; Report on health and social subjects no 9; HMSO: London, UK, 1974. [Google Scholar]
  16. DHSS (Department of Health and Social Security). Present Day Practice in Infant Feeding; Report on health and social subjects no 20; HMSO: London, UK, 1980. [Google Scholar]
  17. Weaning and the Weaning Diet. Report of the Working Group on the Weaning Diet of the Committee on Medical Aspects of Food Policy. Rep. Health Soc. Subj. (Lond.) 1994, 45, 1–113. [Google Scholar]
  18. King, C. An evidence based guide to weaning preterm infants. Paediatr. Child Health 2009, 19, 405–414. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Palmer, D.J. Introducing solid foods to preterm infants in developed countries. Ann. Nutr. Metab. 2012, 60, 31–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Norris, F.J.; Larkin, M.S.; Williams, C.M.; Hampton, S.M.; Morgan, J.B. Factors affecting the introduction of complementary foods in the preterm infant. Eur. J. Clin. Nutr. 2002, 56, 448–454. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  21. Baldassarre, M.E.; Di Mauro, A.; Pedico, A.; Rizzo, V.; Capozza, M.; Fabio Meneghin, F.; Lista, G.; Laforgia, N. Weaning Time in Preterm Infants: An Audit of Italian Primary Care Paediatricians. Nutrients 2018, 10, 616. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  22. Barachetti, R.; Villa, E.; Barbarini, M. Weaning and complementary feeding in preterm infants: Management, timing and health outcome. Pediatr. Med. Chir. 2017, 39, 181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  23. Hagan, J.F.; Shaw, J.S.; Duncan, P.M. (Eds.) Bright Futures: Guidelines for Health Supervision of Infants, Children, and Adolescents, 4th Ed.; American Academy of Pediatrics: Elk Grove Village, IL, USA, 2017. [Google Scholar]
  24. Marriott, L.D.; Foote, K.D.; Bishop, J.A.; Kimber, A.C.; Morgan, J.B. Weaning preterm infants: A randomized controlled trial. Arch. Dis. Child. Fetal. Neonatal. Ed. 2003, 88, F302–F307. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  25. Spiegler, J.; Eisemann, N.; Ehlers, S.; Orlikowsky, T.; Kannt, O.; Herting, E.; Göpel, W. Length and weight of very low birth weight infants in Germany at 2 years of age: Does it matter at what age they start complementary food? Eur. J. Clin. Nutr. 2015, 69, 662–667. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Rodriguez, J.; Affuso, O.; Azuero, A.; Downs, C.A.; Turner-Henson, A.; Rice, M. Infant Feeding Practices and Weight Gain in Toddlers Born Very Preterm: A Pilot Study. J. Pediatr. Nurs. 2018, 43, 29–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. Gupta, S.; Agarwal, R.; Aggarwal, K.C.; Chellani, H.; Duggal, A.; Arya, S.; Bhatia, S.; Sankar, M.J.; Sreenivas, V.; Jain, V.; et al. Complementary feeding at 4 versus 6 months of age for preterm infants born at less than 34 weeks of gestation: A randomised, open-label, multicentre trial. Lancet Glob. Health 2017, 5, e501–e511. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  28. Morgan, J.B.; Lucas, A.; Fewtrell, M.S. Does weaning influence growth and health up to 18 months? Arch. Dis. Child. 2004, 89, 728–733. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Sun, C.; Foskey, R.J.; Allen, K.J.; Dharmage, S.C.; Koplin, J.J.; Ponsonby, A.L. The impact of timing of introduction of solids on infant body mass index. J. Pediatr. 2016, 179, 104–110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Baldassarre, M.E.; Giannì, M.L.; Di Mauro, A.; Mosca, F.; Laforgia, N. Complementary Feeding in Preterm Infants: Where Do We Stand? Nutrients 2020, 12, 1259. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/nu12051259

AMA Style

Baldassarre ME, Giannì ML, Di Mauro A, Mosca F, Laforgia N. Complementary Feeding in Preterm Infants: Where Do We Stand? Nutrients. 2020; 12(5):1259. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/nu12051259

Chicago/Turabian Style

Baldassarre, Maria Elisabetta, Maria Lorella Giannì, Antonio Di Mauro, Fabio Mosca, and Nicola Laforgia. 2020. "Complementary Feeding in Preterm Infants: Where Do We Stand?" Nutrients 12, no. 5: 1259. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/nu12051259

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop