Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40355562›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of pediatrics2025

Anti-regurgitation infant formulas and antacid medication: match or mismatch?

Eline Tommelein, Kyara Baert, Mathieu Ombecq, Silke Henry, Valérie Vanhoorne

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of pediatrics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Starch-based thickening in infant formula:Frontiers in nutrition · 2026
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Eline TommeleinExperimental Pharmacology, Department of Pharmaceutical and Pharmacological Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Pharmacy, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Laarbeeklaan 103, B-1090, Jette, Belgium. eline.tommelein@vub.be.
Kyara BaertLaboratory of Pharmaceutical Technology, Department of Pharmaceutics, Ghent University, Ottergemsesteenweg 460, B-9000, Ghent, Belgium.
Mathieu OmbecqLaboratory of Pharmaceutical Technology, Department of Pharmaceutics, Ghent University, Ottergemsesteenweg 460, B-9000, Ghent, Belgium.
Silke HenryLaboratory of Pharmaceutical Technology, Department of Pharmaceutics, Ghent University, Ottergemsesteenweg 460, B-9000, Ghent, Belgium.
Valérie VanhoorneLaboratory of Pharmaceutical Technology, Department of Pharmaceutics, Ghent University, Ottergemsesteenweg 460, B-9000, Ghent, Belgium.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A perceived need for treatment has led to the development and widespread marketing of various anti-regurgitation (AR) infant formulas, promoted as effective solutions for managing regurgitation symptoms. For practice, limited comparative data exists on the specific thickening agents, or the relative thicknesses of AR formulas. An added concern is that some infants on AR formulas simultaneously receive pharmacological treatments for reflux, such as antacids or gastric acid inhibitors, and no information about compatibility is available. One reference formula (Nutrilon® Profutura 1, Nutricia) and four formulas labelled as 'anti-regurgitation' with different nutritional compositions were used to evaluate the effect of pH and time on viscosity. The viscosity of marketed AR formulas was tested with a rotational rheometer. All four AR formulas demonstrated higher viscosity compared to the reference formula, with notable differences based on the thickening strategy used by the manufacturer. Pre-thickened CBG-based AR formulas generally showed higher viscosity than pre-thickened starch-based formulas. Adding a casein-dominant protein fraction increased viscosity in acidic environments; however, this effect gradually diminished over time, likely due to protein hydrolysis. Moderate (pH 4) compared to strong acidic conditions (pH 1) had only minimal impact on viscosity, indicating compatibility with gastric acid inhibitors across all AR formulas.

conclusionOur findings suggest that CBG-based AR formulas should be allowed to stand for at least 30 min after preparation to achieve the intended viscosity. Additionally, AR formulas thickened with CBG generally exhibit higher viscosity than pre-thickened starch-based formulas. Notably, casein-based thickening occurs even when gastric acid suppressants are used, and combining casein with acid suppression may even slow down the rate of viscosity reduction over time. WHAT IS KNOWN: • Commercially available infant formula sometimes uses thickening agents to reduce regurgitation, but their effectiveness may vary depending on composition and gastric conditions. • Some thickening agents require an acidic environment to activate, which may be compromised by concurrent use of gastric acid suppressants. WHAT IS NEW: • This study demonstrates that CBG-based AR formulas generally maintain higher viscosity than starch-based formulas, even with acid suppression. • Viscosity in some formulas changes over time, indicating that preparation timing affects therapeutic consistency.

Indexed as

AntacidsGastroesophageal RefluxInfant FormulaLaryngopharyngeal RefluxHumansHydrogen-Ion ConcentrationInfantViscosityAntacidsAntacidsGastroesophageal refluxInfant formulaPaediatricsProton pump inhibitorViscosity

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.