Early versus late administration of amino acids in preterm infants receiving parenteral nutrition.

BACKGROUND: Observational studies in preterm newborns suggest that delay in administering amino acids (AA) could result in a protein catabolic state and impact on growth and development. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this review was to compare the efficacy and safety of early versus late administration of intravenous AA in neonates born at < 37 weeks of gestation. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and trial registries in March 2023. We checked the reference lists of included studies and studies/systematic reviews where subject matter related to the intervention or population examined in this review. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing early administration of AA with late administration in premature newborn infants. We defined early administration of AA solution as the administration of AA in isolation or with total parenteral nutrition within the first 24 hours of birth, and late administration as the administration of AA in isolation or with total parenteral nutrition after the first 24 hours of birth. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methodological procedures. We used the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of the evidence. MAIN RESULTS: Nine studies (383 participants) were eligible for inclusion in the review. All study participants were born at < 37 weeks of gestation and were inpatients in neonatal intensive care units. No studies reported growth during the first months of life as assessed by difference in weight. Early administration of AA may have little or no effect on growth in the first month of life as measured by length (mean difference (MD) 0.00, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.41 to 0.41; 1 study; 21 participants; low-certainty evidence) and head circumference (MD 0.05, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.14; 2 studies; 87 participants; low-certainty evidence). No studies reported the discharge weight outcome. Early administration of AA may result in little to no difference in neurodevelopmental outcome assessed by Mental Developmental Index (MDI) of < 70 at two years of age (odds ratio 0.83, 95% CI 0.21 to 3.28; 1 study; 111 participants; low-certainty evidence). No studies reported all-cause mortality at 28 days and before discharge. Early administration of AA may result in a large increase in positive nitrogen balance in the first three days of life (MD 250.42, 95% CI 224.91 to 275.93; 4 studies; 93 participants; low-certainty evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Low-certainty evidence suggests that there may be little to no difference between early and late administration of AA in growth (measured by length and head circumference during the first month after birth) and neurodevelopmental outcome (assessed by MDI of < 70). No RCTs reported on weight in the first month of life, mortality (all-cause mortality at 28 days and before discharge), or discharge weight. Low-certainty evidence suggests a large increase in positive nitrogen balance in preterm infants who received AA within 24 hours of birth. The clinical relevance of this observation is unknown. The number of infants in the RCTs included in the review was small, and there was clinical heterogeneity amongst trials. Adequately powered trials in infants < 37 weeks' gestation are required to determine optimal timing of initiation of AA. We identified two ongoing studies. Both studies will be recruiting infants ≥ 34 weeks of gestation and may or may not add to the outcome data for this review.

Infant formulas containing hydrolysed protein for prevention of allergic disease.

BACKGROUND: Infant formulas containing hydrolysed proteins have been widely advocated for preventing allergic disease in infants, in place of standard cow's milk formula (CMF). However, it is unclear whether the clinical trial evidence supports this. OBJECTIVES: To compare effects on allergic disease when infants are fed a hydrolysed formula versus CMF or human breast milk. If hydrolysed formulas are effective, to determine what type of hydrolysed formula is most effective, including extensively or partially hydrolysed formula (EHF/PHF). To determine whether infants at low or high risk of allergic disease, and whether infants receiving early short-term (first few days after birth) or prolonged formula feeding benefit from hydrolysed formulas. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2017, Issue 11), MEDLINE (1948 to 3 November 2017), and Embase (1974 to 3 November 2017). We also searched clinical trials databases, conference proceedings, and the reference lists of retrieved articles and previous reviews for randomised controlled trials and quasi-randomised trials. SELECTION CRITERIA: We searched for randomised and quasi-randomised trials that compared use of a hydrolysed formula versus human milk or CMF. Outcomes with ≥ 80% follow-up of participants from eligible trials were eligible for inclusion. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected trials, assessed trial quality and extracted data from the included studies. Fixed-effect analyses were performed. The treatment effects were expressed as risk ratio (RR) and risk difference (RD) with 95% confidence intervals and quality of evidence using the GRADE quality of evidence approach. The primary outcome was all allergic disease (including asthma, atopic dermatitis, allergic rhinitis and food allergy). MAIN RESULTS: A total of 16 studies were included.Two studies assessed the effect of three to four days infant supplementation with an EHF while in hospital after birth versus pasteurised human milk feed. A single study enrolling 90 infants reported no difference in all allergic disease (RR 1.43, 95% CI 0.38 to 5.37) or any specific allergic disease up to childhood including cow's milk allergy (CMA) (RR 7.11, 95% CI 0.35 to 143.84). A single study reported no difference in infant CMA (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.46; participants = 3559). Quality of evidence was assessed as very low for all outcomes.No eligible trials compared prolonged hydrolysed formula versus human milk feeding.Two studies assessed the effect of three to four days infant supplementation with an EHF versus a CMF. A single study enrolling 90 infants reported no difference in all allergic disease (RR 1.37, 95% CI 0.33 to 5.71; participants = 77) or any specific allergic disease including CMA up to childhood. A single study reported a reduction in infant CMA of borderline significance (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.38 to 1.00; participants = 3473). Quality of evidence was assessed as very low for all outcomes.Twelve studies assessed the effect of prolonged infant feeding with a hydrolysed formula compared with a CMF. The data showed no difference in all allergic disease in infants (typical RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.01; participants = 2852; studies = 8) and children (typical RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.05; participants = 950; studies = 2), and no difference in any specific allergic disease including infant asthma (typical RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.31 to 1.04; participants = 318; studies = 4), eczema (typical RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.09; participants = 2896; studies = 9), rhinitis (typical RR 0.52, 95% CI 0.14 to 1.85; participants = 256; studies = 3), food allergy (typical RR 1.42, 95% CI 0.87 to 2.33; participants = 479; studies = 2), and CMA (RR 2.31, 95% CI 0.24 to 21.97; participants = 338; studies = 1). Quality of evidence was assessed as very low for all outcomes. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We found no evidence to support short-term or prolonged feeding with a hydrolysed formula compared with exclusive breast feeding for prevention of allergic disease. Very low-quality evidence indicates that short-term use of an EHF compared with a CMF may prevent infant CMA. Further trials are recommended before implementation of this practice.We found no evidence to support prolonged feeding with a hydrolysed formula compared with a CMF for prevention of allergic disease in infants unable to be exclusively breast fed.

Higher versus lower amino acid intake in parenteral nutrition for newborn infants.

BACKGROUND: Sick newborn and preterm infants frequently are not able to be fed enterally, necessitating parenteral fluid and nutrition. Potential benefits of higher parenteral amino acid (AA) intake for improved nitrogen balance, growth, and infant health may be outweighed by the infant's ability to utilise high intake of parenteral AA, especially in the days after birth. OBJECTIVES: The primary objective is to determine whether higher versus lower intake of parenteral AA is associated with improved growth and disability-free survival in newborn infants receiving parenteral nutrition.Secondary objectives include determining whether:• higher versus lower starting or initial intake of amino acids is associated with improved growth and disability-free survival without side effects;• higher versus lower intake of amino acids at maximal intake is associated with improved growth and disability-free survival without side effects; and• increased amino acid intake should replace non-protein energy intake (glucose and lipid), should be added to non-protein energy intake, or should be provided simultaneously with non-protein energy intake.We conducted subgroup analyses to look for any differences in the effects of higher versus lower intake of amino acids according to gestational age, birth weight, age at commencement, and condition of the infant, or concomitant increases in fluid intake. SEARCH METHODS: We used the standard search strategy of the Cochrane Neonatal Review Group to search the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (2 June 2017), MEDLINE (1966 to 2 June 2017), Embase (1980 to 2 June 2017), and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) (1982 to 2 June 2017). We also searched clinical trials databases, conference proceedings, and citations of articles. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials of higher versus lower intake of AAs as parenteral nutrition in newborn infants. Comparisons of higher intake at commencement, at maximal intake, and at both commencement and maximal intake were performed. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected trials, assessed trial quality, and extracted data from included studies. We performed fixed-effect analyses and expressed treatment effects as mean difference (MD), risk ratio (RR), and risk difference (RD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and assessed the quality of evidence using the GRADE approach. MAIN RESULTS: Thirty-two studies were eligible for inclusion. Six were short-term biochemical tolerance studies, one was in infants at > 35 weeks' gestation, one in term surgical newborns, and three yielding no usable data. The 21 remaining studies reported clinical outcomes in very preterm or low birth weight infants for inclusion in meta-analysis for this review.Higher AA intake had no effect on mortality before hospital discharge (typical RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.17; participants = 1407; studies = 14; I2 = 0%; quality of evidence: low). Evidence was insufficient to show an effect on neurodevelopment and suggest no reported benefit (quality of evidence: very low). Higher AA intake was associated with a reduction in postnatal growth failure (< 10th centile) at discharge (typical RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.97; participants = 203; studies = 3; I2 = 22%; typical RD -0.15, 95% CI -0.27 to -0.02; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 7, 95% CI 4 to 50; quality of evidence: very low). Subgroup analyses found reduced postnatal growth failure in infants that commenced on high amino acid intake (> 2 to ≤ 3 g/kg/day); that occurred with increased amino acid and non-protein caloric intake; that commenced on intake at < 24 hours' age; and that occurred with early lipid infusion.Higher AA intake was associated with a reduction in days needed to regain birth weight (MD -1.14, 95% CI -1.73 to -0.56; participants = 950; studies = 13; I2 = 77%). Data show varying effects on growth parameters and no consistent effects on anthropometric z-scores at any time point, as well as increased growth in head circumference at discharge (MD 0.09 cm/week, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.13; participants = 315; studies = 4; I2 = 90%; quality of evidence: very low).Higher AA intake was not associated with effects on days to full enteral feeds, late-onset sepsis, necrotising enterocolitis, chronic lung disease, any or severe intraventricular haemorrhage, or periventricular leukomalacia. Data show a reduction in retinopathy of prematurity (typical RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.93; participants = 269; studies = 4; I2 = 31%; quality of evidence: very low) but no difference in severe retinopathy of prematurity.Higher AA intake was associated with an increase in positive protein balance and nitrogen balance. Potential biochemical intolerances were reported, including risk of abnormal blood urea nitrogen (typical RR 2.77, 95% CI 2.13 to 3.61; participants = 688; studies = 7; I2 = 6%; typical RD 0.26, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.32; number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) 4; 95% CI 3 to 5; quality of evidence: high). Higher amino acid intake in parenteral nutrition was associated with a reduction in hyperglycaemia (> 8.3 mmol/L) (typical RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.49 to 0.96; participants = 505; studies = 5; I2 = 68%), although the incidence of hyperglycaemia treated with insulin was not different. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Low-quality evidence suggests that higher AA intake in parenteral nutrition does not affect mortality. Very low-quality evidence suggests that higher AA intake reduces the incidence of postnatal growth failure. Evidence was insufficient to show an effect on neurodevelopment. Very low-quality evidence suggests that higher AA intake reduces retinopathy of prematurity but not severe retinopathy of prematurity. Higher AA intake was associated with potentially adverse biochemical effects resulting from excess amino acid load, including azotaemia. Adequately powered trials in very preterm infants are required to determine the optimal intake of AA and effects of caloric balance in parenteral nutrition on the brain and on neurodevelopment.

WITHDRAWN: Infant formulas containing hydrolysed protein for prevention of allergic disease and food allergy.

BACKGROUND: Allergy is common and may be associated with foods, including cow's milk formula (CMF). Formulas containing hydrolysed proteins have been used to treat infants with allergy. However, it is unclear whether hydrolysed formulas can be advocated for prevention of allergy in infants. OBJECTIVES: To compare effects on allergy and food allergy when infants are fed a hydrolysed formula versus CMF or human breast milk. If hydrolysed formulas are effective, to determine what type of hydrolysed formula is most effective, including extensively or partially hydrolysed formula (EHF/PHF). To determine which infants at low or high risk of allergy and which infants receiving early, short-term or prolonged formula feeding may benefit from hydrolysed formulas. SEARCH METHODS: We used the standard search strategy of the Cochrane Neonatal Review Group supplemented by cross referencing of previous reviews and publications (updated August 2016). SELECTION CRITERIA: We searched for randomised and quasi-randomised trials that compared use of a hydrolysed formula versus human milk or CMF. Trials with ≥ 80% follow-up of participants were eligible for inclusion. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We independently assessed eligibility of studies for inclusion, methodological quality and data extraction. Primary outcomes included clinical allergy, specific allergy and food allergy. We conducted meta-analysis using a fixed-effect (FE) model. MAIN RESULTS: Two studies assessed the effect of three to four days' infant supplementation with an EHF whilst in hospital after birth versus pasteurised human milk feed. Results showed no difference in infant allergy or childhood cow's milk allergy (CMA). No eligible trials compared prolonged hydrolysed formula versus human milk feeding.Two studies assessed the effect of three to four days infant supplementation with an EHF versus a CMF. One large quasi-random study reported a reduction in infant CMA of borderline significance among low-risk infants (risk ratio (RR) 0.62, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.38 to 1.00).Prolonged infant feeding with a hydrolysed formula compared with a CMF was associated with a reduction in infant allergy (eight studies, 2852 infants; FE RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.95; risk difference (RD) -0.04, 95% CI -0.08 to -0.01; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 25, 95% CI 12.5 to 100) and infant CMA (two studies, 405 infants; FE RR 0.38, 95% CI 0.16 to 0.86). We had substantial methodological concerns regarding studies and concerns regarding publication bias, as substantial numbers of studies including those in high-risk infants have not comprehensively reported allergy outcomes (GRADE quality of evidence 'very low').Prolonged infant feeding with a hydrolysed formula compared with a CMF was not associated with a difference in childhood allergy and led to no differences in specific allergy, including infant and childhood asthma, eczema and rhinitis and infant food allergy. Many of the analyses assessing specific allergy are underpowered.Subroup analyses showed that infant allergy was reduced in studies that enrolled infants at high risk of allergy who used a hydrolysed formula compared with a CMF; used a PHF compared with a CMF; used prolonged and exclusive feeding of a hydrolysed formula compared with a CMF; and used a partially hydrolysed whey formula compared with a CMF. Studies that enrolled infants at high risk of allergy; used a PHF compared with a CMF; used prolonged and exclusive feeding of a hydrolysed formula compared with a CMF; and used a partially hydrolysed whey formula compared with a CMF found a reduction in infant CMA. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We found no evidence to support short-term or prolonged feeding with a hydrolysed formula compared with exclusive breast feeding for prevention of allergy. Very low-quality evidence indicates that short-term use of an EHF compared with a CMF may prevent infant CMA.In infants at high risk of allergy not exclusively breast fed, very low-quality evidence suggests that prolonged hydrolysed formula feeding compared with CMF feeding reduces infant allergy and infant CMA. Studies have found no difference in childhood allergy and no difference in specific allergy, including infant and childhood asthma, eczema and rhinitis and infant food allergy.Very low-quality evidence shows that prolonged use of a partially hydrolysed formula compared with a CMF for partial or exclusive feeding was associated with a reduction in infant allergy incidence and CMA incidence, and that prolonged use of an EHF versus a PHF reduces infant food allergy.

Infant formulas containing hydrolysed protein for prevention of allergic disease and food allergy.

BACKGROUND: Allergy is common and may be associated with foods, including cow's milk formula (CMF). Formulas containing hydrolysed proteins have been used to treat infants with allergy. However, it is unclear whether hydrolysed formulas can be advocated for prevention of allergy in infants. OBJECTIVES: To compare effects on allergy and food allergy when infants are fed a hydrolysed formula versus CMF or human breast milk. If hydrolysed formulas are effective, to determine what type of hydrolysed formula is most effective, including extensively or partially hydrolysed formula (EHF/PHF). To determine which infants at low or high risk of allergy and which infants receiving early, short-term or prolonged formula feeding may benefit from hydrolysed formulas. SEARCH METHODS: We used the standard search strategy of the Cochrane Neonatal Review Group supplemented by cross referencing of previous reviews and publications (updated August 2016). SELECTION CRITERIA: We searched for randomised and quasi-randomised trials that compared use of a hydrolysed formula versus human milk or CMF. Trials with ≥ 80% follow-up of participants were eligible for inclusion. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We independently assessed eligibility of studies for inclusion, methodological quality and data extraction. Primary outcomes included clinical allergy, specific allergy and food allergy. We conducted meta-analysis using a fixed-effect (FE) model. MAIN RESULTS: Two studies assessed the effect of three to four days' infant supplementation with an EHF whilst in hospital after birth versus pasteurised human milk feed. Results showed no difference in infant allergy or childhood cow's milk allergy (CMA). No eligible trials compared prolonged hydrolysed formula versus human milk feeding.Two studies assessed the effect of three to four days' infant supplementation with an EHF versus a CMF. One large quasi-random study reported a reduction in infant CMA of borderline significance among low-risk infants (risk ratio (RR) 0.62, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.38 to 1.00).Prolonged infant feeding with a hydrolysed formula compared with a CMF was associated with a reduction in infant allergy (eight studies, 2852 infants; FE RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.95; risk difference (RD) -0.04, 95% CI -0.08 to -0.01; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 25, 95% CI 12.5 to 100) and infant CMA (two studies, 405 infants; FE RR 0.38, 95% CI 0.16 to 0.86). We had substantial methodological concerns regarding studies and concerns regarding publication bias, as substantial numbers of studies including those in high-risk infants have not comprehensively reported allergy outcomes (GRADE quality of evidence 'very low').Prolonged infant feeding with a hydrolysed formula compared with a CMF was not associated with a difference in childhood allergy and led to no differences in specific allergy, including infant and childhood asthma, eczema and rhinitis and infant food allergy. Many of the analyses assessing specific allergy are underpowered.Subroup analyses showed that infant allergy was reduced in studies that enrolled infants at high risk of allergy who used a hydrolysed formula compared with a CMF; used a PHF compared with a CMF; used prolonged and exclusive feeding of a hydrolysed formula compared with a CMF; and used a partially hydrolysed whey formula compared with a CMF. Studies that enrolled infants at high risk of allergy; used a PHF compared with a CMF; used prolonged and exclusive feeding of a hydrolysed formula compared with a CMF; and used a partially hydrolysed whey formula compared with a CMF found a reduction in infant CMA. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We found no evidence to support short-term or prolonged feeding with a hydrolysed formula compared with exclusive breast feeding for prevention of allergy. Very low-quality evidence indicates that short-term use of an EHF compared with a CMF may prevent infant CMA.In infants at high risk of allergy not exclusively breast fed, very low-quality evidence suggests that prolonged hydrolysed formula feeding compared with CMF feeding reduces infant allergy and infant CMA. Studies have found no difference in childhood allergy and no difference in specific allergy, including infant and childhood asthma, eczema and rhinitis and infant food allergy.Very low-quality evidence shows that prolonged use of a partially hydrolysed formula compared with a CMF for partial or exclusive feeding was associated with a reduction in infant allergy incidence and CMA incidence, and that prolonged use of an EHF versus a PHF reduces infant food allergy.

Polyunsaturated fatty acid supplementation in infancy for the prevention of allergy.

BACKGROUND: Early dietary intakes may influence the development of allergic disease. It is important to determine if dietary polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs) given as supplements or added to infant formula prevent the development of allergy. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effect of higher PUFA intake during infancy to prevent allergic disease. SEARCH METHODS: We used the standard search strategy of the Cochrane Neonatal Review group to search the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2015, Issue 9), MEDLINE (1966 to 14 September 2015), EMBASE (1980 to 14 September 2015) and CINAHL (1982 to 14 September 2015). We also searched clinical trials databases, conference proceedings, and the reference lists of retrieved articles for randomised controlled trials and quasi-randomised trials. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials that compared the use of a PUFA with no PUFA in infants for the prevention of allergy. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected trials, assessed trial quality and extracted data from the included studies. We used fixed-effect analyses. The treatment effects were expressed as risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). We used the GRADE approach to assess the quality of evidence. MAIN RESULTS: The search found 17 studies that assessed the effect of higher versus lower intake of PUFAs on allergic outcomes in infants. Only nine studies enrolling 2704 infants reported allergy outcomes that could be used in meta-analyses. Of these, there were methodological concerns for eight.In infants up to two years of age, meta-analyses found no difference in incidence of all allergy (1 study, 323 infants; RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.26; risk difference (RD) -0.02, 95% CI -0.12 to 0.09; heterogeneity not applicable), asthma (3 studies, 1162 infants; RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.35, I2 = 0%; RD 0.01, 95% CI -0.04 to 0.05, I2 = 0%), dermatitis/eczema (7 studies, 1906 infants; RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.06, I2 = 0%; RD -0.02, 95% CI -0.06 to 0.02, I2 = 0%) or food allergy (3 studies, 915 infants; RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.19, I2 = 63%; RD -0.02, 95% CI -0.06 to 0.02, I2 = 74%). There was a reduction in allergic rhinitis (2 studies, 594 infants; RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.96, I2 = 6%; RD -0.04, 95% CI -0.08 to -0.00, I2 = 54%; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 25, 95% CI 13 to ∞).In children aged two to five years, meta-analysis found no difference in incidence of all allergic disease (2 studies, 154 infants; RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.47 to 1.02, I2 = 43%; RD -0.16, 95% CI -0.31 to -0.00, I2 = 63%; NNTB 6, 95% CI 3 to ∞), asthma (1 study, 89 infants; RR 0.45, 95% CI 0.20 to 1.02; RD -0.20, 95% CI -0.37 to -0.02; heterogeneity not applicable; NNTB 5, 95% CI 3 to 50), dermatitis/eczema (2 studies, 154 infants; RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.34 to 1.24, I2 = 0%; RD -0.09 95% CI -0.22 to 0.04, I2 = 24%) or food allergy (1 study, 65 infants; RR 2.27, 95% CI 0.25 to 20.68; RD 0.05, 95% CI -0.07 to 0.16; heterogeneity not applicable).In children aged two to five years, meta-analysis found no difference in prevalence of all allergic disease (2 studies, 633 infants; RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.19, I2 = 36%; RD -0.01, 95% CI -0.08 to 0.07, I2 = 0%), asthma (2 studies, 635 infants; RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.53, I2 = 0%; RD 0.02, 95% CI -0.04 to 0.09, I2 = 0%), dermatitis/eczema (2 studies, 635 infants; RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.09, I2 = 0%; RD -0.04 95% CI -0.11 to 0.02, I2 = 0%), allergic rhinitis (2 studies, 635 infants; RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.25, I2 = 0%; RD 0.01, 95% CI -0.06 to 0.08, I2 = 0%) or food allergy (1 study, 119 infants; RR 0.27, 95% CI 0.06 to 1.19; RD -0.10, 95% CI -0.20 to -0.00; heterogeneity not applicable; NNTB 10, 95% CI 5 to ∞). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is no evidence that PUFA supplementation in infancy has an effect on infant or childhood allergy, asthma, dermatitis/eczema or food allergy. However, the quality of evidence was very low. There was insufficient evidence to determine an effect on allergic rhinitis.

Polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFA) for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in children and adolescents.

BACKGROUND: Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a major problem in children and adolescents, characterised by age-inappropriate levels of inattention, hyperactivity and impulsivity, and is associated with long-term social, academic and mental health problems. The stimulant medications methylphenidate and amphetamine are the most frequently used treatments for ADHD, but these are not always effective and can be associated with side effects. Clinical and biochemical evidence suggests that deficiencies of polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFA) could be related to ADHD. Children and adolescents with ADHD have been shown to have significantly lower plasma and blood concentrations of PUFA and, in particular, lower levels of omega-3 PUFA. These findings suggest that PUFA supplementation may reduce the attention and behaviour problems associated with ADHD. OBJECTIVES: To compare the efficacy of PUFA to other forms of treatment or placebo in treating the symptoms of ADHD in children and adolescents. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the following databases in August 2011: CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2011, Issue 2), MEDLINE (1948 to July Week 3, 2011), EMBASE (1980 to 2011 Week 29), PsycINFO (1806 to current), CINAHL (1937 to current), BIOSIS (1969 to 30 July 2011), Science Citation Index (1970 to 30 July 2011), Social Science Citation Index (1970 to 30 July 2011), Conference Proceedings Citation Index - Science (1990 to 30 July 2011), Conference Proceedings Citation Index - Social Science and Humanities (1990 to 30 July 2011), Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (2011, Issue 7), DARE (2011 Issue 2), Dissertation Abstracts (via Dissertation Express) and the metaRegister of Controlled Trials (mRCT). In addition, we searched the following repositories for theses on 2 August 2011: DART, NTLTD and TROVE. We also checked reference lists of relevant studies and reviews for additional references. SELECTION CRITERIA: Two review authors independently assessed the results of the database searches. We resolved any disagreements regarding the selection of studies through consensus or, if necessary, by consultation with a third member of the review team. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two members of the review team independently extracted details of participants and setting, interventions, methodology and outcome data. If differences were identified, we resolved them by consensus or referral to a third member of the team. We made all reasonable attempts to contact the authors where further clarification or missing data were needed. MAIN RESULTS: We included 13 trials with 1011 participants in the review. After screening 366 references, we considered 23 relevant and obtained the full text for consideration. We excluded five papers and included 18 papers describing the 13 trials. Eight of the included trials had a parallel design: five compared an omega-3 PUFA supplement to placebo; two compared a combined omega-3 and omega-6 supplement to placebo, and one compared an omega-3 PUFA to a dietary supplement. Five of the included trials had a cross-over design: two compared combined omega-3/6 PUFA to placebo; two compared omega-6 PUFA with placebo; one compared omega-3 to omega-6 PUFA, and one compared omega-6 PUFA to dexamphetamine. Supplements were given for a period of between four and 16 weeks.There was a significantly higher likelihood of improvement in the group receiving omega-3/6 PUFA compared to placebo (two trials, 97 participants; risk ratio (RR) 2.19, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.04 to 4.62). However, there were no statistically significant differences in parent-rated ADHD symptoms (five trials, 413 participants; standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.17, 95% CI -0.38 to 0.03); inattention (six trials, 469 participants; SMD -0.04, 95% CI -0.29 to 0.21) or hyperactivity/impulsivity (five trials, 416 participants; SMD -0.04, 95% CI -0.25 to 0.16) when all participants receiving PUFA supplements were compared to those receiving placebo.There were no statistically significant differences in teacher ratings of overall ADHD symptoms (four trials, 324 participants; SMD 0.05, 95% CI -0.18 to 0.27); inattention (three trials, 260 participants; SMD 0.26, 95% CI -0.22 to 0.74) or hyperactivity/impulsivity (three trials, 259 participants; SMD 0.10, 95% CI -0.16 to 0.35).There were also no differences between groups in behaviour, side effects or loss to follow-up.Overall, there were no other differences between groups for any other comparison. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Overall, there is little evidence that PUFA supplementation provides any benefit for the symptoms of ADHD in children and adolescents. The majority of data showed no benefit of PUFA supplementation, although there were some limited data that did show an improvement with combined omega-3 and omega-6 supplementation.It is important that future research addresses current weaknesses in this area, which include small sample sizes, variability of selection criteria, variability of the type and dosage of supplementation, short follow-up times and other methodological weaknesses.

A global survey of changing patterns of food allergy burden in children.

While food allergies and eczema are among the most common chronic non-communicable diseases in children in many countries worldwide, quality data on the burden of these diseases is lacking, particularly in developing countries. This 2012 survey was performed to collect information on existing data on the global patterns and prevalence of food allergy by surveying all the national member societies of the World Allergy Organization, and some of their neighbouring countries. Data were collected from 89 countries, including published data, and changes in the health care burden of food allergy. More than half of the countries surveyed (52/89) did not have any data on food allergy prevalence. Only 10% (9/89) of countries had accurate food allergy prevalence data, based on oral food challenges (OFC). The remaining countries (23/89) had data largely based on parent-reporting of a food allergy diagnosis or symptoms, which is recognised to overestimate the prevalence of food allergy. Based on more accurate measures, the prevalence of clinical (OFC proven) food allergy in preschool children in developed countries is now as high as 10%. In large and rapidly emerging societies of Asia, such as China, where there are documented increases in food allergy, the prevalence of OFC-proven food allergy is now around 7% in pre-schoolers, comparable to the reported prevalence in European regions. While food allergy appears to be increasing in both developed and developing countries in the last 10-15 years, there is a lack of quality comparative data. This survey also highlights inequities in paediatric allergy services, availability of adrenaline auto-injectors and standardised National Anaphylaxis Action plans. In conclusion, there remains a need to gather more accurate data on the prevalence of food allergy in many developed and developing countries to better anticipate and address the rising community and health service burden of food allergy.