SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2018
Formula versus donor breast milk for feeding preterm or low birth weight infants.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 153 papers, 15 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
153 citing papers in PubMed, 15 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 721 citations in OpenAlex.
- Donor human milk for preventing necrotising enterocolitis in very preterm or very low-birthweight infants.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Evaluation of Risk and Preventive Factors for Necrotizing Enterocolitis in Premature Newborns. A Systematic Review of the Literature.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2022Pooled it
- The effect of milk type and fortification on the growth of low-birthweight infants: An umbrella review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses.Maternal & child nutrition · 2021Pooled it
- A systematic review of economic evaluations for donor human milk versus standard feeding in infants.Maternal & child nutrition · 2021Pooled it
- Feeding Interventions for Infants with Growth Failure in the First Six Months of Life: A Systematic Review.Nutrients · 2020Pooled it
- The Nutritional Composition and Energy Content of Donor Human Milk: A Systematic Review.Advances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.) · 2020Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Evidence that informs feeding practices in very low birthweight and very preterm infants in sub-Saharan Africa: an overview of systematic reviews.BMJ paediatrics open · 2020Pooled it
- Breastfeeding and the Risk of Infant Illness in Asia: A Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2019Pooled it
- Human milk-derived fortifier versus bovine milk-derived fortifier for prevention of mortality and morbidity in preterm neonates.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2019Pooled it
- Formula versus maternal breast milk for feeding preterm or low birth weight infants.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2019Pooled it
- Formula versus donor breast milk for feeding preterm or low birth weight infants.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2019Pooled it
- Banked preterm versus banked term human milk to promote growth and development in very low birth weight infants.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2019Pooled it
- European Consensus Guidelines on the Management of Respiratory Distress Syndrome - 2019 Update.Neonatology · 2019Guideline
- Effect of an Exclusive Human Milk Diet on the Gut Microbiome in Preterm Infants: A Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA network open · 2023Trial
- Bonding, Relaxation, Separation, and Connection: Expressing Human Milk While Videoconferencing with the Hospitalized Premature Infant.Breastfeeding medicine : the official journal of the Academy of Breastfeeding Medicine · 2022Trial
- Optimizing the growth of very-low-birth-weight infants requires targeting both nutritional and nonnutritional modifiable factors specific to stage of hospitalization.The American journal of clinical nutrition · 2019Trial
- Improving resilience in human milk banking: workshop proceedings, 11th November, London UK.BMC proceedings · 2026Article
- Nutritional management after necrotizing enterocolitis and focal intestinal perforation in preterm infants.Pediatric research · 2026Review
93 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Updated by
- Update of
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWhen sufficient maternal breast milk is not available, alternative forms of enteral nutrition for preterm or low birth weight (LBW) infants are donor breast milk or artificial formula. Donor breast milk may retain some of the non-nutritive benefits of maternal breast milk for preterm or LBW infants. However, feeding with artificial formula may ensure more consistent delivery of greater amounts of nutrients. Uncertainty exists about the balance of risks and benefits of feeding formula versus donor breast milk for preterm or LBW infants.
objectivesTo determine the effect of feeding with formula compared with donor breast milk on growth and development in preterm or low birth weight (LBW) infants. SEARCH
methodsWe used the Cochrane Neonatal search strategy, including electronic searches of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2017, Issue 6), Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (until 8 June 2017), as well as conference proceedings and previous reviews. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing feeding with formula versus donor breast milk in preterm or LBW infants. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors assessed trial eligibility and risk of bias and extracted data independently. We analysed treatment effects as described in the individual trials and reported risk ratios (RRs) and risk differences (RDs) for dichotomous data, and mean differences (MDs) for continuous data, with respective 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We used a fixed-effect model in meta-analyses and explored potential causes of heterogeneity in subgroup analyses. We assessed the quality of evidence for the main comparison at the outcome level using "Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation" (GRADE) methods. MAIN
resultsEleven trials, in which 1809 infants participated in total, fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Four trials compared standard term formula versus donor breast milk and seven compared nutrient-enriched preterm formula versus donor breast milk. Only the four most recent trials used nutrient-fortified donor breast milk. The trials contain various weaknesses in methodological quality, specifically concerns about allocation concealment in four trials and lack of blinding in most of the trials.Formula-fed infants had higher in-hospital rates of weight gain (mean difference (MD) 2.51, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.93 to 3.08 g/kg/day), linear growth (MD 1.21, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.65 mm/week) and head growth (MD 0.85, 95% CI 0.47 to 1.23 mm/week). We did not find evidence of an effect on long-term growth or neurodevelopment. Formula feeding increased the risk of necrotising enterocolitis (typical risk ratio (RR) 1.87, 95% CI 1.23 to 2.85; risk difference (RD) 0.03, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.06).The GRADE quality of evidence was moderate for rates of weight gain, linear growth, and head growth (downgraded for high levels of heterogeneity) and was moderate for neurodevelopmental disability, all-cause mortality, and necrotising enterocolitis (downgraded for imprecision). AUTHORS'
conclusionsIn preterm and LBW infants, feeding with formula compared with donor breast milk, either as a supplement to maternal expressed breast milk or as a sole diet, results in higher rates of weight gain, linear growth, and head growth and a higher risk of developing necrotising enterocolitis. The trial data do not show an effect on all-cause mortality, or on long-term growth or neurodevelopment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.