A Decision Tree for Donor Human Milk: An Example Tool to Protect, Promote, and Support Breastfeeding

The use of donor human milk is increasing for high-risk infants, primarily for infants born weighing <1500 g or those who have severe intestinal disorders. Pasteurized donor milk may be considered in situations in which the supply of maternal milk is insufficient. The use of pasteurized donor milk is safe when appropriate measures are used to screen donors and collect, store, and pasteurize the milk and then distribute it through established human milk banks. The use of nonpasteurized donor milk and other forms of direct, Internet-based, or informal human milk sharing does not involve this level of safety and is not recommended. It is important that health care providers counsel families considering milk sharing about the risks of bacterial or viral contamination of nonpasteurized human milk and about the possibilities of exposure to medications, drugs, or herbs in human milk. Currently, the use of pasteurized donor milk is limited by its availability and affordability. The development of public policy to improve and expand access to pasteurized donor milk, including policies that support improved governmental and private financial support for donor milk banks and the use of donor milk, is important.

Abstract Objective: The aim of this study was to compare outcomes of infants pre and post initiation of a feeding protocol providing an exclusive human milk–based diet (HUM). Materials and Methods: In a multicenter retrospective cohort study, infants with a birth weight <1,250 g who received a bovine-based diet (BOV) of mother's own milk fortified with bovine fortifier and/or preterm formula were compared to infants who received a newly introduced HUM feeding protocol. Infants were excluded if they had major congenital anomalies or died in the first 12 hours of life. Data were collected 2–3 years prior to and after introduction of an exclusive HUM diet. Primary outcomes were necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC) and mortality. Secondary outcomes included late-onset sepsis, retinopathy of prematurity (ROP), and bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD). Results: A total of 1,587 infants were included from four centers in Texas, Illinois, Florida, and California. There were no differences in baseline demographics or growth of infants. The HUM group had significantly lower incidence of proven NEC (16.7% versus 6.9%, p < 0.00001), mortality (17.2% versus 13.6%, p = 0.04), late-onset sepsis (30.3% versus 19.0%, p < 0.00001), ROP (9% versus 5.2%, p = 0.003), and BPD (56.3% versus 47.7%, p = 0.0015) compared with the BOV group. Conclusions: Extremely premature infants who received an exclusive HUM diet had a significantly lower incidence of NEC and mortality. The HUM group also had a reduction in late-onset sepsis, BPD, and ROP. This multicenter study further emphasizes the many benefits of an exclusive HUM diet, and demonstrates multiple improved outcomes after implementation of such a feeding protocol.

Preterm birth survivors are at a higher risk of growth and developmental disabilities compared to their term counterparts. Development of strategies to lower the complications of preterm birth forms the rising need of the hour. Appropriate nutrition is essential for the growth and development of preterm infants. Early administration of optimal nutrition to preterm birth survivors lowers the risk of adverse health outcomes and improves cognition in adulthood. A group of neonatologists, pediatricians, and nutrition experts convened to discuss and frame evidence-based recommendations for optimizing nutrition in preterm low birth weight (LBW) infants. The following were the primary recommendations of the panel: (1) enteral feeding is safe and may be preferred to parenteral nutrition due to the complications associated with the latter; however, parenteral nutrition may be a useful adjunct to enteral feeding in some critical cases; (2) early, fast, or continuous enteral feeding yields better outcomes compared to late, slow, or intermittent feeding, respectively; (3) routine use of nasogastric tubes is not advisable; (4) preterm infants can be fed while on ventilator or continuous positive airway pressure; (5) routine evaluation of gastric residuals and abdominal girth should be avoided; (6) expressed breast milk (EBM) is the first choice for feeding preterm infants due to its beneficial effects on cardiovascular, neurological, bone health, and growth outcomes; the second choice is donor pasteurized human milk; (7) EBM or donor milk may be fortified with human milk fortifiers, without increasing the osmolality of the milk, to meet the high protein requirements of preterm infants; (8) standard fortification is effective and safe but does not fulfill the high protein needs; (9) use of targeted and adjustable fortification, where possible, helps provide optimal nutrition; (10) optimizing weight gain in preterm infants prevents long-term cardiovascular complications; (11) checking for optimal weight and sucking/swallowing ability is essential prior to discharge of preterm infants; and (12) appropriate counseling and regular follow-up and monitoring after discharge will help achieve better long-term health outcomes. This consensus summary serves as a useful guide to clinicians in addressing the challenges and providing optimal nutrition to preterm LBW infants.