Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Intermittent Bolus or Semicontinuous Feeding for Preterm Infants?

  • Lyanne W. W. Rövekamp-Abels
  • , Jacomine E. Hogewind-Schoonenboom
  • , Daphne P. M. de Wijs-Meijler
  • , Margaux D. Maduro
  • , Marijke C. Jansen-van der Weide
  • , Johannes B. van Goudoever
  • , Jessie M. Hulst

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

42 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

The aim of the present study was to assess the clinical benefits and risks of semicontinuous (CON) versus intermittent nasogastric tube feeding in low-birth-weight infants. Infants with a birth weight <1750 g and gestational age <32 weeks were stratified according to birth weight and assigned to either CON or intermittent bolus (BOL) feeding. The primary endpoint was days to full enteral feeding (defined as 120 mL(-1) · kg(-1) · day(-1)). We also collected data on feeding tolerance, weight gain, respiratory support, and complications (sepsis, necrotising enterocolitis, and death). There was no difference between the 2 groups (CON n = 121, BOL n = 125) in days to reach full enteral feeding--7 (5-10) versus 6 (5-8) days, respectively, with a difference 1 (-0.05 to 2.1). Mean daily gastric residual volumes, however, were significantly lower in the BOL group (4.8 vs 3.9 mL/day, difference 0.9 mL/day [0.1-1.7]), as was the total number of patients with feeding interruptions (76 vs 59, difference 16% [3%-28%]). Bolus and continuous feeding are equally suitable feeding strategies for preterm neonates. BOL feeding, however, may be preferable
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)659-664
JournalJournal of pediatric gastroenterology and nutrition
Volume61
Issue number6
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2015

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Intermittent Bolus or Semicontinuous Feeding for Preterm Infants?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this