Plain abdominal radiography is the current standard imaging modality for evaluation of necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC). Sonography is still not routinely used for diagnosis and follow-up, as it is not widely recognized that it can provide information that is not provided by plain abdominal radiography and that may affect the management of NEC. Like plain abdominal radiography, sonography can depict intramural gas, portal venous gas, and free intraperitoneal gas. However, the major advantages of abdominal sonography over plain abdominal radiography are that it can depict intraabdominal fluid, bowel wall thickness, and bowel wall perfusion. Sonography may depict changes consistent with NEC when the plain abdominal radiographic findings are nonspecific and inconclusive. Thinning of the bowel wall and lack of perfusion at sonography are highly suggestive of nonviable bowel and may be seen before visualization of pneumoperitoneum at plain abdominal radiography. The mortality rate is higher after perforation; thus, earlier detection of severely ischemic or necrotic bowel loops, before perforation occurs, could potentially improve the morbidity and mortality in NEC. The information provided by sonography allows a more complete understanding of the state of the bowel in patients with NEC and may thus make management decisions easier and potentially change outcome.
Color Doppler US is more accurate than abdominal radiography in depicting bowel necrosis in NEC.
IMPORTANCE For many very low-birth-weight (VLBW) infants, there is insufficient mother's milk, and a supplement of pasteurized donor human milk or preterm formula is required. Awareness of the benefits of mother's milk has led to an increase in use of donor milk, despite limited data evaluating its efficacy.OBJECTIVE To determine if nutrient-enriched donor milk compared with formula, as a supplement to mother's milk, reduces neonatal morbidity, supports growth, and improves neurodevelopment in VLBW infants. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTSIn this pragmatic, double-blind, randomized trial, VLBW infants were recruited from 4 neonatal units in Ontario, Canada, within 96 hours of birth between October 2010 and December 2012. Follow-up was completed in July 2015.INTERVENTIONS Infants were fed either donor milk or formula for 90 days or to discharge when mother's milk was unavailable. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURESThe primary outcome was the cognitive composite score on the Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development, Third Edition (Bayley-III) at 18 months' corrected age (standardized mean, 100 [SD,15]; minimal clinically important difference, 5 points). Secondary outcomes included Bayley-III language and motor composite scores, growth, and a dichotomous mortality and morbidity index. RESULTSOf 840 eligible infants, 363 (43.2%) were randomized (181 to donor milk and 182 to preterm formula); of survivors, 299 (92%) had neurodevelopment assessed. Mean birth weight and gestational age of infants was 996 (SD, 272) g and 27.7 (2.6) weeks, respectively, and 195 (53.7%) were male. No statistically significant differences in mean Bayley-III cognitive composite score (adjusted scores, 92.9 in donor milk group vs 94.5 in formula group; fully adjusted mean difference, −2.0 [95% CI, −5.8 to 1.8]), language composite score (adjusted scores, 87.3 in donor milk group vs 90.3 in formula group; fully adjusted mean difference, −3.1 [95% CI, −7.5 to 1.3]), or motor composite score (adjusted scores, 91.8 in donor milk group vs 94.0 in formula group; fully adjusted mean difference, −3.7 [95% CI, −7.4 to 0.09]) were observed between groups. There was no statistically significant difference in infants positive for the mortality and morbidity index (43% in donor milk group, 40% in formula group) or changes in growth z scores.CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Among VLBW infants, use of supplemental donor milk compared with formula did not improve neurodevelopment at 18 months' corrected age. If donor milk is used in settings with high provision of mother's milk, this outcome should not be considered a treatment goal.
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.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.