-
Psychiatrike = Psychiatriki Sep 2022Autism is a complex spectrum of disorders with genetic, epigenetic, autoimmune, oxidative stress, and environmental etiologies. Treatment of ASD using dietary approach...
Autism is a complex spectrum of disorders with genetic, epigenetic, autoimmune, oxidative stress, and environmental etiologies. Treatment of ASD using dietary approach is a promising strategy, especially owing to its safety and availability. Our study critically analysed the roles and efficacy of antioxidants, probiotics, prebiotics, camel milk and vitamin D. This systematic review provides an updated synopsis of human studies that investigated therapeutic benefits of these dietary interventions in autism. A total of 943 papers were identified out of which 21 articles were included in the systematic review. The selected studies investigated the impact of 5 different dietary supplementations in ASD symptom and behaviours. These agents include; antioxidants/polyphenolic compounds, probiotics, prebiotics, camel milk and vitamin D. From the results of the present review, antioxidants/polyphenolic compounds decreased the levels of inflammatory cytokines and improved behavioural symptoms. Probiotics improved behavioural and GI symptoms as well as restored gut microbiota equilibrium. Prebiotics decreased levels of inflammatory cytokines, improved behavioural and GI symptoms and improved gut microbiota. Vitamin D improved behavioural symptoms and offered protective effects against neurotoxicity. Camel milk reduced inflammatory responses and oxidative stress. Given the chronic nature as well as early onset of ASD, dietary supplements become useful to complement nutritional deficiencies in children with ASD. Key benefits of these agents stem from their ability to target multiple physiological areas via the gut brain-axis and are devoid of potential harmful or aggravating effects on ASD patients. The evidence collated in this review propose that dietary intervention may provide a new platform for the management of autism.
Topics: Animals; Antioxidants; Autism Spectrum Disorder; Camelus; Child; Cytokines; Humans; Prebiotics; Vitamin D
PubMed: 35477082
DOI: 10.22365/jpsych.2022.073 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Aug 2022Probiotics are live micro-organisms that may give a beneficial physiological effect when administered in adequate amounts. Some trials show that probiotic strains can... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Probiotics are live micro-organisms that may give a beneficial physiological effect when administered in adequate amounts. Some trials show that probiotic strains can prevent respiratory infections. Even though our previously published review showed the benefits of probiotics for acute upper respiratory tract infections (URTIs), several new studies have been published. This is an update of a review first published in 2011 and updated in 2015.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effectiveness and safety of probiotics (any specified strain or dose), compared with placebo or no treatment, in the prevention of acute URTIs in people of all ages, at risk of acute URTIs.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched CENTRAL (2022, Issue 6), MEDLINE (1950 to May week 2, 2022), Embase (1974 to 10 May 2022), Web of Science (1900 to 10 May 2022), the Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, which includes the China Biological Medicine Database (from 1978 to 10 May 2022), the Chinese Medicine Popular Science Literature Database (from 2000 to 10 May 2022), and the Master's Degree Dissertation of Beijing Union Medical College Database (from 1981 to 10 May 2022). We searched the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and ClinicalTrials.gov for completed and ongoing trials on 10 May 2022.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included individual randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and cluster-RCTs comparing probiotics with placebo or no treatment to prevent acute URTIs. The participants were children, adults, or the elderly in the community, care facilities, schools, or hospitals. Our main outcomes were the number of participants diagnosed with URTIs (at least one event and at least three events), the incidence rate (number of cases/person year) of acute URTIs, and the mean duration of an episode of URTIs. Our secondary outcomes were the number of participants who were absent from childcare centre, school, or work due to acute URTIs; the number of participants who used prescribed antibiotics for acute URTIs; and the number of participants who experienced at least one adverse event from probiotics. We excluded studies if they did not specify acute respiratory infections as 'upper'; studies with more than 50% of participants vaccinated against influenza or other acute URTIs within the last 12 months; and studies with significantly different proportions of vaccinated participants between the probiotics arm and the placebo or no treatment arm.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently assessed the eligibility of trials and extracted data using standard Cochrane methodological procedures. We analysed both intention-to-treat and per-protocol data and used a random-effects model. We expressed results as risk ratios (RRs) for dichotomous outcomes and mean differences (MDs) for continuous outcomes, both with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 23 individual RCTs and one cluster-RCT. As one of the individual RCTs did not report outcomes in a usable way, we could only meta-analyse data from 23 trials, involving a total of 6950 participants including children (aged from one month to 11 years old), adults (mean age 37.3), and older people (mean age 84.6 years). One trial reported 22.5% flu-vaccine participants within the last 12 months, and 25.4% flu-vaccine participants during the intervention. Probiotics were more likely to be given with milk-based food in children; administered in powder form in adults; and given with milk-based food or in capsules in the elderly. Most of the studies used one or two strains (e.g. Lactobacillus plantarum HEAL9, Lactobacillus paracasei (8700:2 or N1115)) and 10 or 10 colony-forming units (CFU)/day of probiotics for more than three months. We found that probiotics may reduce the number of participants diagnosed with URTIs (at least one event) (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.87; P < 0.001; 16 studies, 4798 participants; low-certainty evidence); likely reduce the number of participants diagnosed with URTIs (at least three events) (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.91; P = 0.02; 4 studies, 763 participants; moderate-certainty evidence); may reduce the incidence rate (number of cases/person year) of URTIs (rate ratio 0.82, 95% CI 0.73 to 0.92, P = 0.001; 12 studies, 4364 participants; low-certainty evidence); may reduce the mean duration of an episode of acute URTIs (MD -1.22 days, 95% CI -2.12 to -0.33; P = 0.007; 6 studies, 2406 participants; low-certainty evidence); likely reduce the number of participants who used prescribed antibiotics for acute URTIs (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.81; P = 0.001; 6 studies, 1548 participants; moderate-certainty evidence); and may not increase the number of participants who experienced at least one adverse event (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.15; P = 0.79; 8 studies, 2456 participants; low-certainty evidence). Evidence showing a decrease in the number of people absent from childcare centre, school, or work due to acute URTIs with probiotics is very uncertain (RR 0.14, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.59; 1 study, 80 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Adverse events from probiotics were minor, and most commonly gastrointestinal symptoms, such as vomiting, flatulence, diarrhoea, and bowel pain. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Overall, we found that probiotics were better than placebo or no treatment in preventing acute URTIs.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Child; Humans; Influenza Vaccines; Influenza, Human; Probiotics; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Respiratory Tract Infections
PubMed: 36001877
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD006895.pub4 -
Nutrients Jan 2021Recent evidence supports a role of probiotics in preventing necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC) in preterm infants. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Recent evidence supports a role of probiotics in preventing necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC) in preterm infants.
METHODS
A systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the role of probiotics in preventing NEC in preterm infants, focusing on the differential effect of type of feeding, was performed following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. A random-effects model was used; a subgroup analysis on exclusively human milk (HM)-fed infants vs. infants receiving formula (alone or with HM) was performed.
RESULTS
Fifty-one trials were included (10,664 infants, 29 probiotic interventions); 31 studies (19 different probiotic regimens) were suitable for subgroup analysis according to feeding. In the overall analysis, LB revealed the most promising effect for reducing NEC risk (odds ratio (OR), 0.03; 95% credible intervals (CrIs), 0.00-0.21). The subgroup analysis showed that Bb-12/B94 was associated with a reduced risk of NEC stage ≥2 in both feeding type populations, with a discrepancy in the relative effect size in favour of exclusively HM-fed infants (OR 0.04; 95% CrIs <0.01-0.49 vs. OR 0.32; 95% CrIs 0.10-0.36).
CONCLUSIONS
Bb-12/B94 could reduce NEC risk with a different size effect according to feeding type. Of note, most probiotic strains are evaluated in few trials and relatively small populations, and outcome data according to feeding type are not available for all RCTs. Further trials are needed to confirm the present findings.
Topics: Databases, Factual; Enterocolitis, Necrotizing; Female; Humans; Infant, Newborn; Infant, Newborn, Diseases; Infant, Premature; Lactobacillus acidophilus; Male; Middle Aged; Network Meta-Analysis; Probiotics
PubMed: 33435456
DOI: 10.3390/nu13010192 -
Preventing food allergy in infancy and childhood: Systematic review of randomised controlled trials.Pediatric Allergy and Immunology :... Oct 2020This systematic review of ways to prevent immediate-onset/IgE-mediated food allergy will inform guidelines by the European Academy of Allergy and Immunology (EAACI).
BACKGROUND
This systematic review of ways to prevent immediate-onset/IgE-mediated food allergy will inform guidelines by the European Academy of Allergy and Immunology (EAACI).
METHODS
The GRADE approach was used. Eleven databases were searched from 1946 to October 2019 for randomized controlled trials (and large prospective cohort studies in the case of breastfeeding). The studies included heterogeneous interventions, populations, and outcomes and so were summarized narratively.
RESULTS
Forty-six studies examined interventions to reduce the risk of food allergy in infancy (up to 1 year) or early childhood. The following interventions for pregnant or breastfeeding women and/or infants may have little to no effect on preventing food allergy, but the evidence is very uncertain: dietary avoidance of food allergens, vitamin supplements, fish oil, probiotics, prebiotics, synbiotics, and emollients. Breastfeeding, hydrolyzed formulas, and avoiding cow's milk formula may not reduce the risk of cow's milk protein allergy; however, temporary supplementation with cow's milk formula in the first week of life may increase the risk of cow's milk allergy. Introducing well-cooked egg, but not pasteurized raw egg, from 4 to 6 months probably reduces the risk of hen's egg allergy. Introducing regular peanut consumption into the diet of an infant at increased risk beginning from 4 to 11 months probably results in a large reduction in peanut allergy in countries with a high prevalence. These conclusions about introducing peanut are based on moderate certainty evidence, from single trials in high-income countries.
CONCLUSIONS
Sixty percent of the included studies were published in the last 10 years, but much still remains to be understood about preventing food allergy. In particular, there is a need to validate the potential benefits of early introduction of food allergens in a wider range of populations.
Topics: Adolescent; Allergens; Animals; Breast Feeding; Child; Child, Preschool; Diet; Egg Hypersensitivity; Female; Food Hypersensitivity; Humans; Infant; Infant Formula; Male; Milk; Milk Hypersensitivity; Milk, Human; Peanut Hypersensitivity; Pregnancy; Probiotics; Protein Hydrolysates; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 32396244
DOI: 10.1111/pai.13273 -
The Journal of Allergy and Clinical... May 2022Previous reports suggested that food proteins present in human milk (HM) may trigger symptoms in allergic children during breastfeeding, but existing evidence has never...
BACKGROUND
Previous reports suggested that food proteins present in human milk (HM) may trigger symptoms in allergic children during breastfeeding, but existing evidence has never been reviewed systematically.
OBJECTIVE
To assess the probability of food proteins in HM to trigger allergic reactions in infants with IgE-mediated food allergy.
METHODS
Electronic bibliographic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE) were systematically searched from inception to November 3, 2021. The data regarding the levels of food proteins detected in HM were extracted and compared with data from the Voluntary Incidental Trace Allergen Labelling (VITAL 3.0) guide to assess the probability of food-allergic individuals to experience immediate type allergic reactions on ingesting HM.
RESULTS
A total of 32 studies were identified. Fourteen studies assessed excretion of cow's milk proteins into HM, 9 egg, 4 peanut, and 2 wheat; 3 measured levels of cow's milk and egg proteins simultaneously. We found that levels of all food proteins across the studies were much lower than the eliciting dose for 1% of allergic individuals (ED01) in most of the samples. The probability of an IgE-mediated allergic reaction in a food-allergic infant breastfed by a woman consuming the relevant food can be estimated as ≤1:1000 for cow's milk, egg, peanut, and wheat.
CONCLUSIONS
To our knowledge, this is the first systematic review that assesses and summarizes evidence on food proteins in HM and potential for IgE-mediated allergic reactions. Our data suggest that the probability of IgE-mediated allergic reactions to food proteins in HM is low.
Topics: Allergens; Animals; Arachis; Breast Feeding; Cattle; Female; Food Hypersensitivity; Humans; Hypersensitivity, Immediate; Immunoglobulin E; Infant; Milk Hypersensitivity; Milk Proteins; Milk, Human; Probability
PubMed: 35123103
DOI: 10.1016/j.jaip.2022.01.028 -
Oxidative Medicine and Cellular... 2021Despite evidence of health benefits from kefir administration, a systematic review with meta-analysis on bioactive compounds associated with these benefits is still... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Despite evidence of health benefits from kefir administration, a systematic review with meta-analysis on bioactive compounds associated with these benefits is still absent in the literature. Kefir is fermented milk resulting from the metabolism of a complex microbiota in symbiosis. Recent researches have investigated the bioactive compounds responsible for the preventive and therapeutic effects attributed to kefir. However, differences in functional potential between industrial and artisanal kefir are still controversial. Firstly, we identified differences in the microbial composition among both types of kefir. Available evidence concerning the action of different bioactive compounds from kefir on health, both from and studies, was subsequently summarized to draw a primary conclusion of the dose and the intervention time for effect, the producer microorganisms, the precursor in the milk, and the action mechanism. Meta-analysis was performed to investigate the statistically significant differences ( < 0.05) between intervention and control and between both types of kefir for each health effect studied. In summary, the bioactive compounds more commonly reported were exopolysaccharides, including kefiran, bioactive peptides, and organic acids, especially lactic acid. Kefir bioactive compounds presented antimicrobial, anticancer, and immune-modulatory activities corroborated by the meta-analysis. However, clinical evidence is urgently needed to strengthen the practical applicability of these bioactive compounds. The mechanisms of their action were diverse, indicating that they can act by different signaling pathways. Still, industrial and artisanal kefir may differ regarding functional potential-OR of 8.56 (95% CI: 2.27-32.21, ≤ .001)-according to the observed health effect, which can be associated with differences in the microbial composition between both types of kefir.
Topics: Animals; Anti-Infective Agents; Antineoplastic Agents; Biological Products; Fermentation; Humans; Immunomodulating Agents; Kefir; Milk
PubMed: 34745425
DOI: 10.1155/2021/9081738 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Aug 2019Artificial formula can be manipulated to contain higher amounts of macro-nutrients than maternal breast milk but breast milk confers important immuno-nutritional...
BACKGROUND
Artificial formula can be manipulated to contain higher amounts of macro-nutrients than maternal breast milk but breast milk confers important immuno-nutritional advantages for preterm or low birth weight (LBW) infants.
OBJECTIVES
To determine the effect of feeding preterm or LBW infants with formula compared with maternal breast milk on growth and developmental outcomes.
SEARCH METHODS
We used the standard strategy of Cochrane Neonatal to search the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2018, Issue 9), and Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, Ovid Maternity & Infant Care Database, and CINAHL to October 2018. We searched clinical trials databases, conference proceedings, and the reference lists of retrieved articles.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials that compared feeding preterm or low birth weight infants with formula versus maternal breast milk.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors planned independently to assess trial eligibility and risk of bias, and extract data. We planned to analyse treatment effects as described in the individual trials and report risk ratios and risk differences for dichotomous data, and mean differences for continuous data, with 95% confidence intervals. We planned to use a fixed-effect model in meta-analyses and to explore potential causes of heterogeneity in subgroup analyses. We planned to use the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of evidence.
MAIN RESULTS
We did not identify any eligible trials.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There are no trials of formula versus maternal breast milk for feeding preterm or low birth weight infants. Such trials are unlikely to be conducted because of the difficulty of allocating an alternative form of nutrition to an infant whose mother wishes to feed with her own breast milk. Maternal breast milk remains the default choice of enteral nutrition because observational studies, and meta-analyses of trials comparing feeding with formula versus donor breast milk, suggest that feeding with breast milk has major immuno-nutritional advantages for preterm or low birth weight infants.
Topics: Humans; Infant; Infant Formula; Infant Nutritional Physiological Phenomena; Infant, Low Birth Weight; Infant, Newborn; Infant, Premature; Milk, Human; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Weight Gain
PubMed: 31452191
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD002972.pub3 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jul 2019When sufficient maternal breast milk is not available, alternative forms of enteral nutrition for preterm or low birth weight (LBW) infants are donor breast milk or...
BACKGROUND
When sufficient maternal breast milk is not available, alternative forms of enteral nutrition for preterm or low birth weight (LBW) infants are donor breast milk or artificial formula. Donor breast milk may retain some of the non-nutritive benefits of maternal breast milk for preterm or LBW infants. However, feeding with artificial formula may ensure more consistent delivery of greater amounts of nutrients. Uncertainty exists about the balance of risks and benefits of feeding formula versus donor breast milk for preterm or LBW infants.
OBJECTIVES
To determine the effect of feeding with formula compared with donor breast milk on growth and development in preterm or low birth weight (LBW) infants.
SEARCH METHODS
We used the Cochrane Neonatal search strategy, including electronic searches of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2019, Issue 5), Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (3 May 2019), as well as conference proceedings, previous reviews, and clinical trials.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing feeding with formula versus donor breast milk in preterm or LBW infants.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors assessed trial eligibility and risk of bias and extracted data independently. We analysed treatment effects as described in the individual trials and reported risk ratios (RRs) and risk differences (RDs) for dichotomous data, and mean differences (MDs) for continuous data, with respective 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We used a fixed-effect model in meta-analyses and explored potential causes of heterogeneity in subgroup analyses. We assessed the certainty of evidence for the main comparison at the outcome level using GRADE methods.
MAIN RESULTS
Twelve trials with a total of 1879 infants fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Four trials compared standard term formula versus donor breast milk and eight compared nutrient-enriched preterm formula versus donor breast milk. Only the five most recent trials used nutrient-fortified donor breast milk. The trials contain various weaknesses in methodological quality, specifically concerns about allocation concealment in four trials and lack of blinding in most of the trials. Most of the included trials were funded by companies that made the study formula.Formula-fed infants had higher in-hospital rates of weight gain (mean difference (MD) 2.51, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.93 to 3.08 g/kg/day), linear growth (MD 1.21, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.65 mm/week) and head growth (MD 0.85, 95% CI 0.47 to 1.23 mm/week). These meta-analyses contained high levels of heterogeneity. We did not find evidence of an effect on long-term growth or neurodevelopment. Formula feeding increased the risk of necrotising enterocolitis (typical risk ratio (RR) 1.87, 95% CI 1.23 to 2.85; risk difference (RD) 0.03, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.05; number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) 33, 95% CI 20 to 100; 9 studies, 1675 infants).The GRADE certainty of evidence was moderate for rates of weight gain, linear growth, and head growth (downgraded for high levels of heterogeneity) and was moderate for neurodevelopmental disability, all-cause mortality, and necrotising enterocolitis (downgraded for imprecision).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
In preterm and LBW infants, moderate-certainty evidence indicates that feeding with formula compared with donor breast milk, either as a supplement to maternal expressed breast milk or as a sole diet, results in higher rates of weight gain, linear growth, and head growth and a higher risk of developing necrotising enterocolitis. The trial data do not show an effect on all-cause mortality, or on long-term growth or neurodevelopment.
Topics: Humans; Infant; Infant Formula; Infant Nutritional Physiological Phenomena; Infant, Low Birth Weight; Infant, Newborn; Infant, Premature; Milk, Human; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Weight Gain
PubMed: 31322731
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD002971.pub5 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... May 2020Many women express concern about their ability to produce enough milk, and insufficient milk is frequently cited as the reason for supplementation and early termination... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Many women express concern about their ability to produce enough milk, and insufficient milk is frequently cited as the reason for supplementation and early termination of breastfeeding. When addressing this concern, it is important first to consider the influence of maternal and neonatal health, infant suck, proper latch, and feeding frequency on milk production, and that steps be taken to correct or compensate for any contributing issues. Oral galactagogues are substances that stimulate milk production. They may be pharmacological or non-pharmacological (natural). Natural galactagogues are usually botanical or other food agents. The choice between pharmacological or natural galactagogues is often influenced by familiarity and local customs. Evidence for the possible benefits and harms of galactagogues is important for making an informed decision on their use.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effect of oral galactagogues for increasing milk production in non-hospitalised breastfeeding mother-term infant pairs.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov, the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), Health Research and Development Network - Phillippines (HERDIN), Natural Products Alert (Napralert), the personal reference collection of author LM, and reference lists of retrieved studies (4 November 2019).
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs (including published abstracts) comparing oral galactagogues with placebo, no treatment, or another oral galactagogue in mothers breastfeeding healthy term infants. We also included cluster-randomised trials but excluded cross-over trials.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth methods for data collection and analysis. Two to four review authors independently selected the studies, assessed the risk of bias, extracted data for analysis and checked accuracy. Where necessary, we contacted the study authors for clarification.
MAIN RESULTS
Forty-one RCTs involving 3005 mothers and 3006 infants from at least 17 countries met the inclusion criteria. Studies were conducted either in hospitals immediately postpartum or in the community. There was considerable variation in mothers, particularly in parity and whether or not they had lactation insufficiency. Infants' ages at commencement of the studies ranged from newborn to 6 months. The overall certainty of evidence was low to very low because of high risk of biases (mainly due to lack of blinding), substantial clinical and statistical heterogeneity, and imprecision of measurements. Pharmacological galactagogues Nine studies compared a pharmacological galactagogue (domperidone, metoclopramide, sulpiride, thyrotropin-releasing hormone) with placebo or no treatment. The primary outcome of proportion of mothers who continued breastfeeding at 3, 4 and 6 months was not reported. Only one study (metoclopramide) reported on the outcome of infant weight, finding little or no difference (mean difference (MD) 23.0 grams, 95% confidence interval (CI) -47.71 to 93.71; 1 study, 20 participants; low-certainty evidence). Three studies (metoclopramide, domperidone, sulpiride) reported on milk volume, finding pharmacological galactagogues may increase milk volume (MD 63.82 mL, 95% CI 25.91 to 101.72; I² = 34%; 3 studies, 151 participants; low-certainty evidence). Subgroup analysis indicates there may be increased milk volume with each drug, but with varying CIs. There was limited reporting of adverse effects, none of which could be meta-analysed. Where reported, they were limited to minor complaints, such as tiredness, nausea, headache and dry mouth (very low-certainty evidence). No adverse effects were reported for infants. Natural galactagogues Twenty-seven studies compared natural oral galactagogues (banana flower, fennel, fenugreek, ginger, ixbut, levant cotton, moringa, palm dates, pork knuckle, shatavari, silymarin, torbangun leaves or other natural mixtures) with placebo or no treatment. One study (Mother's Milk Tea) reported breastfeeding rates at six months with a concluding statement of "no significant difference" (no data and no measure of significance provided, 60 participants, very low-certainty evidence). Three studies (fennel, fenugreek, moringa, mixed botanical tea) reported infant weight but could not be meta-analysed due to substantial clinical and statistical heterogeneity (I = 60%, 275 participants, very low-certainty evidence). Subgroup analysis shows we are very uncertain whether fennel or fenugreek improves infant weight, whereas moringa and mixed botanical tea may increase infant weight compared to placebo. Thirteen studies (Bu Xue Sheng Ru, Chanbao, Cui Ru, banana flower, fenugreek, ginger, moringa, fenugreek, ginger and turmeric mix, ixbut, mixed botanical tea, Sheng Ru He Ji, silymarin, Xian Tong Ru, palm dates; 962 participants) reported on milk volume, but meta-analysis was not possible due to substantial heterogeneity (I = 99%). The subgroup analysis for each intervention suggested either benefit or little or no difference (very low-certainty evidence). There was limited reporting of adverse effects, none of which could be meta-analysed. Where reported, they were limited to minor complaints such as mothers with urine that smelled like maple syrup and urticaria in infants (very low-certainty evidence). Galactagogue versus galactagogue Eight studies (Chanbao; Bue Xue Sheng Ru, domperidone, moringa, fenugreek, palm dates, torbangun, moloco, Mu Er Wu You, Kun Yuan Tong Ru) compared one oral galactagogue with another. We were unable to perform meta-analysis because there was only one small study for each match-up, so we do not know if one galactagogue is better than another for any outcome.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Due to extremely limited, very low certainty evidence, we do not know whether galactagogues have any effect on proportion of mothers who continued breastfeeding at 3, 4 and 6 months. There is low-certainty evidence that pharmacological galactagogues may increase milk volume. There is some evidence from subgroup analyses that natural galactagogues may benefit infant weight and milk volume in mothers with healthy, term infants, but due to substantial heterogeneity of the studies, imprecision of measurements and incomplete reporting, we are very uncertain about the magnitude of the effect. We are also uncertain if one galactagogue performs better than another. With limited data on adverse effects, we are uncertain if there are any concerning adverse effects with any particular galactagogue; those reported were minor complaints. High-quality RCTs on the efficacy and safety of galactagogues are urgently needed. A set of core outcomes to standardise infant weight and milk volume measurement is also needed, as well as a strong basis for the dose and dosage form used.
Topics: Administration, Oral; Body Weight; Breast Feeding; Domperidone; Female; Galactogogues; Humans; Infant; Infant, Newborn; Lactation; Metoclopramide; Milk, Human; Mothers; Phytotherapy; Plant Extracts; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Sulpiride; Thyrotropin-Releasing Hormone
PubMed: 32421208
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011505.pub2 -
Nutrients Sep 2019Whey protein (WP) is a dairy food supplement and, due to its effects on fat-free mass (FFM) gain and fat mass (FM) loss, it has been widely consumed by resistance... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Whey protein (WP) is a dairy food supplement and, due to its effects on fat-free mass (FFM) gain and fat mass (FM) loss, it has been widely consumed by resistance training practitioners. This review analyzed the impact of WP supplementation in its concentrated (WPC), hydrolyzed (WPH) and isolated (WPI) forms, comparing it exclusively to isocaloric placebos. Random effect meta-analyses were performed from the final and initial body composition values of 246 healthy athletes undergoing 64.5 ± 15.3 days of training in eight randomized clinical trials (RCT) collected systematically from five scientific databases. The weighted mean difference (WMD) was statistically significant for FM loss (WMD = -0.96, 95% CI = -1.37, -0.55, < 0.001) and, in the analysis of subgroups, this effect was maintained for the WPC (WMD = -0.63, 95% CI = -1.19, -0.06, = 0.030), with protein content between 51% and 80% (WMD = -1.53; 95% CI = -2.13, -0.93, < 0.001), and only for regular physical activity practitioners (WMD = -0.95; 95% CI = -1.70, -0.19, = 0.014). There was no significant effect on FFM in any of the scenarios investigated ( > 0.05). Due to several and important limitations, more detailed analyses are required regarding FFM gain.
Topics: Athletes; Body Composition; Dietary Supplements; Humans; Whey Proteins
PubMed: 31480653
DOI: 10.3390/nu11092047