Seminars in Perinatology
Volume 31, Issue 2 , Pages 61-73, April 2007

Dilemmas Initiating Enteral Feedings in High Risk Infants: How Can They Be Resolved?

  • Jon E. Tyson, MD, MPH

      Affiliations

    • The University of Texas Medical School at Houston, Houston, TX.
    • Corresponding Author InformationAddress reprint requests to Jon E. Tyson, MD, MPH, Center for Clinical Research and Evidence-Based Medicine, The University of Texas Medical School at Houston, 6431 Fannin Street, MSB 2.106, Houston, TX 77030.
  • ,
  • Kathleen A. Kennedy, MD, MPH

      Affiliations

    • The University of Texas Medical School at Houston, Houston, TX.
  • ,
  • Joseph F. Lucke, PhD

      Affiliations

    • The University of Texas Medical School at Houston, Houston, TX.
  • ,
  • Claudia Pedroza, PhD

      Affiliations

    • The University of Texas School of Public Health at Houston, Houston, TX.

In initiating enteral feedings for high-risk infants, clinicians struggle with three fundamental questions: When should enteral feedings be initiated? Should a period of trophic (minimal) feeding be provided? When feedings are advanced, how rapidly should the volume be increased? We present the findings of our systematic reviews of randomized trials addressing each of these questions. These reviews identified various limited short-term benefits of initiating feedings early, providing a period of trophic feedings, and increasing the volume at a relatively rapid rate when feedings are advanced. However, the safety and effectiveness of these approaches are unclear due to limitations in trial design, an inadequate sample size, and the problems inherent in evaluating the effects of initial feeding regimen on necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC) and neurodevelopmental outcome. We provide a detailed description of how a multicenter clinical trial might best be designed to adequately address these questions. In our view, it would be necessary to assess the effect of three feeding regimens on survival without neurodevelopmental impairment (primary outcome) among extremely low birth weight (ELBW) infants. The most daunting obstacle to resolving our current feeding dilemmas is the sample size required to assess all important outcomes. Even in the largest existing research network that achieves a high follow-up rate (the NICHD Neonatal Research Network), it is not feasible to meet conventional (frequentist) sample size requirements. Fortunately, this problem may be addressed using Bayesian methods. (For this reason and because Bayesian methods are likely to be increasingly used in neonatal trials, we provide a brief introduction to these methods.) We show that, with the sample size achievable in the Neonatal Network, Bayesian analyses are likely to provide clear and clinically useful assessments of the probability of benefit for all important clinical outcomes resulting from initial feeding regimens for ELBW infants.

Keywords: early feedings, trophic feedings, minimal enteral nutrition, extremely low birth weight infant, necrotizing entercolitis, clinical trial, systematic review, Bayesian analysis

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

PII: S0146-0005(07)00030-4

doi:10.1053/j.semperi.2007.02.008

Seminars in Perinatology
Volume 31, Issue 2 , Pages 61-73, April 2007