Atopic dermatitis in premature and term children

Kvenshagen, Bente; Jacobsen, Morten; Halvorsen, Ragnhild

doi:10.1136/adc.2008.142869

Cited by 39 publications

(29 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Indeed, some studies found that a low GA was associated with reduced risk of AD [9][10][11] or atopy, 17 while others reported low GA to be linked to a higher risk of AD 8 or atopy. [12][13][14]17 Direct comparisons between these studies are difficult, due to variation in study designs, AD definitions and study populations. [12][13][14]17 Direct comparisons between these studies are difficult, due to variation in study designs, AD definitions and study populations.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Lower risk of atopic dermatitis among infants born extremely preterm compared with higher gestational age

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Lower risk of atopic dermatitis among infants born extremely preterm compared with higher gestational age

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The overall rate of food allergy in this cohort was 4.2%, and no significantly increased risks were found for food allergy development from birth to 7 years of age for either prematurity or low birth weight. In Norway, Kvenshagen et al [37] found that there was no difference in the prevalence of eczema/atopic dermatitis at 2 years of age between 32/161 (19.9%) children born preterm and 63/351 (17.9%) born at term. Adverse reactions to food were found in 15.8% of children with atopic dermatitis, with a similar prevalence in children born preterm (15.6%) compared with those born at term (15.9%).…”

Section: Possible Harms Of An Early Introduction Of Solid Foodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Introducing Solid Foods to Preterm Infants in Developed Countries

Palmer

Makrides

2012

Ann Nutr Metab

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The addition of solid foods to an infant’s diet is required to provide adequate nutrition, as eventually an infant will be unable to consume a sufficient volume of breast milk to meet their nutritional needs. The timing of this important dietary change for infants born preterm (<37 weeks of gestation) should take into consideration their delayed early gross motor developmental progress, increased nutritional requirements, organ immaturity, increased gut permeability and increased risk of hospitalization from infections. Good head control is important for safe eating of solid foods: this developmental milestone may be delayed in preterm infants up to 3 months of corrected age. One randomized controlled trial has demonstrated improved nutritional intakes with the introduction of nutrient-dense solid foods from 13 weeks of uncorrected age, resulting in improved nutritional iron status and greater rate of growth during infancy. There is neither current evidence for an increased infection rate with an early introduction of solid foods in developed countries, nor is there evidence that in preterm infants maturation of renal function is reduced. However, one observational study has determined that preterm infants who had 4 or more solid foods introduced prior to 17 weeks of corrected age, or who had any solid foods introduced prior to 10 weeks of corrected age, had an increased risk of eczema development. A compromise is needed to balance the nutritional benefits of commencing solid foods from 13 weeks of uncorrected age with the risks of increased eczema development, along with ensuring developmental readiness. Based on the current evidence, 3 months (13 weeks) of corrected age seems to be an appropriate age to commence nutrient-dense solid foods for most preterm infants. Further research, with an emphasis on immediate as well as longer-term consequences, would be valuable to provide more specific evidence-based guidelines regarding the introduction of solid food for preterm infants.

show abstract

“…The atopic predisposition of preterm infants might differ from that of term infants and this predisposition may vary for different allergic diseases such as atopic dermatitis and asthma 34–38 . In a recent study, Kvenshagen et al 39 . found no difference in the prevalence of atopic dermatitis between preterm and term infants.…”

Section: Cytokine Responsesmentioning

confidence: 97%

Long-term effects of neonatal glutamine-enriched nutrition in very-low-birth-weight infants

2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Several studies in very-low-birth-weight (VLBW) infants have investigated the effect of parenteral or enteral glutamine supplementation on morbidity, mortality, and outcome in the neonatal period. No evidence of toxicity of glutamine supplementation was found in these clinical trials, but the results for efficacy on a limited number of outcomes have been mixed. The use of glutamine supplementation in VLBW infants has not become routine. Some authors suggest that further study in this area is no longer warranted. In this review, more recent research in the area of glutamine supplementation is described, which suggests additional studies are warranted.

show abstract

Atopic dermatitis in premature and term children

Abstract: The prevalence of AD in the first 2 years of life was 18.6%, with no significant difference between preterm and term children. Adverse reactions to food were found in 15.8% (a similar prevalence in premature and term children). Mode of delivery did not affect prevalence of AD.

Cited by 39 publications

References 17 publications

Lower risk of atopic dermatitis among infants born extremely preterm compared with higher gestational age

Lower risk of atopic dermatitis among infants born extremely preterm compared with higher gestational age

Introducing Solid Foods to Preterm Infants in Developed Countries

Long-term effects of neonatal glutamine-enriched nutrition in very-low-birth-weight infants

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About