Trial reportEuropean journal of pediatrics2026
Early total enteral feeding versus conventional incremental feeding in preterm infants weighing 1000-1250 g: a single-center open-label randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in European journal of pediatrics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Early total enteral feeding (ETEF) may reduce exposure to intravenous fluids and parenteral nutrition in preterm infants. However, evidence regarding its safety and effectiveness remains limited, particularly among preterm infants with a birth weight of 1000-1250 g. We compared ETEF with conventional enteral feeding (CEF) in this population. In this single-center, open-label, randomized controlled trial, preterm infants (≤ 34 weeks' gestation) with birth weights of 1000-1250 g were randomized to ETEF (80 mL/kg/day enteral feeds from day 1; n = 87) or CEF (30 mL/kg/day enteral feeds with intravenous fluid or parenteral nutrition; n = 83). The primary outcome was time to attain full enteral feeding (150 mL/kg/day). Secondary outcomes included feed intolerance, necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC), sepsis, mortality, time to regain birth weight, and duration of intravenous fluid. A total of 170 infants were randomized and followed up. The median (IQR) time to attain full enteral feeds was similar between the ETEF and CEF groups (6.5[5-10] vs. 6.5[5-11] days; p=0.40). Infants receiving ETEF regained birth weight earlier (16[11.5-19] vs. 18.5[13.8-26] days; p=0.008) and required intravenous fluid for a shorter duration (3[0-6] vs. 6[4-9] days; p<0.001). Feed intolerance, NEC, sepsis, hospital stay, and mortality were comparable between the two groups.
conclusionEarly total enteral feeding did not improve the time to achieve full enteral feeding compared with CEF. However, ETEF was associated with earlier regain of birth weight and reduced duration of intravenous fluid therapy. No statistically significant differences were observed in feed intolerance, NEC, sepsis, or mortality.
trial registrationCTRI/2022/09/045974. WHAT IS KNOWN: • Early total enteral feeding may reduce the dependence on parenteral nutrition and intravenous fluid in preterm infants. • Large multicentre evidence now supports feasibility in clinically stable infants born at 30 to 32 WHAT IS NEW: • In preterm infants with birth weight 1000-1250 g, early total enteral feeding did not shorten the time to full enteral feeding compared with conventional feeding. • Early total enteral feeding was associated with earlier regaining of birth weight and a lesser need for intravenous fluid therapy without increasing feed intolerance, necrotizing enterocolitis, sepsis, or mortality.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42593689What 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.