Hostname: page-component-84b7d79bbc-fnpn6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-30T14:40:47.915Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Energy balance and metabolic rate in preterm infants fed with standard and high-energy formulas

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2007

O.G. Brooke
O.G. Brooke
Affiliation:
Department of Child Health, St George's Hospital Medical School, Cranmer Terrace, LondonSW17
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

1. Energy balances were performed on sixteen low birth weight preterm infants over 7–10 d periods on a standard low-solute infant formula (2600 kJ/l), and on four high-energy formulas, providing different energy densities up to 3760 kJ/l. In two of the high-energy formulas the additional fat energy was provided by peanut oil, and in the other two by medium chain triglycerides (MCT). Anthropometric measurements and metabolic rate (MR) determinations were made during the balance periods.

2. Mean energy retention on the standard formula was 66% of the intake and declined to below 50% on the two feeds providing the highest energy. Extensive energy balance data on the standard formula are available for reference.

3. Net absorption of dietary energy increased on all the high-energy formulas, rising from 362 kJ/kg per d on the standard formula to 453 kJ/kg per d on the highest energy-formula (P < 0.001). There was no advantage in using MCT.

4. Net absorption of dietary energy improved with advancing maturity, irrespective of the formula.

5. In spite of the increased dietary energy retention, there was no increase in growth rate during periods of feeding with the high-energy formulas.

6. Fasting and postprandial MR increased by 10.4 and 12.8% respectively on the highest energy feeds.

7. It is concluded that, at least in the short term, this type of high-energy feeding increases MR at the expense of growth and thus is probably of no advantage to the infant.

Type
Papers of direct relevance to Clinical and Human Nutrition
Information
British Journal of Nutrition , Volume 44 , Issue 1 , July 1980 , pp. 13 - 23
Copyright
Copyright © The Nutrition Society 1980

References

REFERENCES

Brooke, O. G. & Alvear, J. (1976). Nutr. Metab. 20, 165.Google Scholar
Brooke, O. G., Alvear, J. & Arnold, M. (1979). Pediat. Res. 13, 215.Google Scholar
Brooke, O. G. & Wheeler, E. F. (1976). Arch. Dis. Child. 51, 968.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Combes, M. A. & Pratt, E. L. (1961). Am. J. Dis. Child. 102, 610.Google Scholar
Committee on Nutrition: Parenteral feeding (1972). Pediatrics, Springfield 49, 776.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Falkner, F., Steigman, A. J. & Cruise, M. O. (1962). J. Pediat. 60, 895.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fomon, S. J., Ziegler, E. E. & Vásquez, H. D. (1977). Am. J. Dis. Child. 131, 463.Google Scholar
Gregory, G. A. (1972). Pediat. Clin. N. Am. 19, 311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gurr, M. I., Rothwell, N. J. & Stock, M. J. (1979). Proc. Nutr. Soc. 38, 6A.Google Scholar
Hardy, J. B. & Goldstein, E. O. (1951). J. Pediat. 34, 154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holt, P. R. (1967). Gastroenterology 53, 961.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keitel, H. G.,Bachman, B. & Smith, I. (1965). Pediat. Clin. N. Am. 12, 337.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keitel, H. G. & Chu, E. (1965). Pediat. Clin. N. Am. 12, 309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, D. S. & Payne, P. R. (1965). Br. J. Nutr. 13, 501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morales, S., Chung, A. W., Lewis, J. M., Messina, A. & Holt, L. E. (1950). Pediatrics, Springfield 6, 86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Postuma, R. & Trevenen, C. L. (1979). Pediatrics, Springfield 63, 110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schon, H., Lippach, I. & Gelpke, W. (1959). Gastroenterologia 91, 199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Snyderman, S. E. & Holt, L. E. (1961). Pediatrics, Springfield 58, 237.Google Scholar
Stevens, L. H. (1970). Aust. Paediat. J. 6, 70.Google Scholar
Tantibhedhyangkul, P. & Hashim, S. A. (1971). Bull. N.Y. Acad. Med. 47, 491.Google Scholar
Wenner, U. (1977). Fortschr. Med. 95, 441.Google Scholar