Mark J Johnson1, Stephen A Wootton, Alison A Leaf, Alan A Jackson. 1. Southampton NIHR Nutrition, Diet and Lifestyle Biomedical Research Unit, Princess Anne Hospital, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, United Kingdom. m.johnson@soton.ac.uk
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Infants born preterm are significantly lighter and shorter on reaching term equivalent age (TEA) than are those born at term, but the relation with body composition is less clear. We conducted a systematic review to assess the body composition at TEA of infants born preterm. METHODS: The databases MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, HMIC, "Web of Science," and "CSA Conference Papers Index" were searched between 1947 and June 2011, with selective citation and reference searching. Included studies had to have directly compared measures of body composition at TEA in preterm infants and infants born full-term. Data on body composition, anthropometry, and birth details were extracted from each article. RESULTS: Eight studies (733 infants) fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Mean gestational age and weight at birth were 30.0 weeks and 1.18 kg in the preterm group and 39.6 weeks and 3.41 kg in the term group, respectively. Meta-analysis showed that the preterm infants had a greater percentage total body fat at TEA than those born full-term (mean difference, 3%; P = .03), less fat mass (mean difference, 50 g; P = .03), and much less fat-free mass (mean difference, 460 g; P < .0001). CONCLUSIONS: The body composition at TEA of infants born preterm is different than that of infants born at term. Preterm infants have less lean tissue but more similar fat mass. There is a need to determine whether improved nutritional management can enhance lean tissue acquisition, which indicates a need for measures of body composition in addition to routine anthropometry.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE:Infants born preterm are significantly lighter and shorter on reaching term equivalent age (TEA) than are those born at term, but the relation with body composition is less clear. We conducted a systematic review to assess the body composition at TEA of infants born preterm. METHODS: The databases MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, HMIC, "Web of Science," and "CSA Conference Papers Index" were searched between 1947 and June 2011, with selective citation and reference searching. Included studies had to have directly compared measures of body composition at TEA in preterm infants and infants born full-term. Data on body composition, anthropometry, and birth details were extracted from each article. RESULTS: Eight studies (733 infants) fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Mean gestational age and weight at birth were 30.0 weeks and 1.18 kg in the preterm group and 39.6 weeks and 3.41 kg in the term group, respectively. Meta-analysis showed that the preterm infants had a greater percentage total body fat at TEA than those born full-term (mean difference, 3%; P = .03), less fat mass (mean difference, 50 g; P = .03), and much less fat-free mass (mean difference, 460 g; P < .0001). CONCLUSIONS: The body composition at TEA of infants born preterm is different than that of infants born at term. Preterm infants have less lean tissue but more similar fat mass. There is a need to determine whether improved nutritional management can enhance lean tissue acquisition, which indicates a need for measures of body composition in addition to routine anthropometry.
Authors: Daniel J Raiten; Alison L Steiber; Susan E Carlson; Ian Griffin; Diane Anderson; William W Hay; Sandra Robins; Josef Neu; Michael K Georgieff; Sharon Groh-Wargo; Tanis R Fenton Journal: Am J Clin Nutr Date: 2016-01-20 Impact factor: 7.045
Authors: Barbara E Cormack; Nicholas D Embleton; Johannes B van Goudoever; William W Hay; Frank H Bloomfield Journal: Pediatr Res Date: 2016-02-11 Impact factor: 3.756
Authors: Luc P Brion; Charles R Rosenfeld; Roy Heyne; L Steven Brown; Cheryl S Lair; Elen Petrosyan; Theresa Jacob; Maria Caraig; Patti J Burchfield Journal: J Perinatol Date: 2020-02-18 Impact factor: 2.521
Authors: Erin A Plummer; Qi Wang; Catherine M Larson-Nath; Johannah M Scheurer; Sara E Ramel Journal: Early Hum Dev Date: 2018-12-17 Impact factor: 2.079
Authors: Caroline Cardozo Bortolotto; Iná S Santos; Juliana Dos Santos Vaz; Alicia Matijasevich; Aluísio J D Barros; Fernando C Barros; Leonardo Pozza Santos; Tiago Neuenfeld Munhoz Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2021-02-09 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Tanis R Fenton; Barbara Cormack; Dena Goldberg; Roseann Nasser; Belal Alshaikh; Misha Eliasziw; William W Hay; Angela Hoyos; Diane Anderson; Frank Bloomfield; Ian Griffin; Nicholas Embleton; Niels Rochow; Sarah Taylor; Thibault Senterre; Richard J Schanler; Seham Elmrayed; Sharon Groh-Wargo; David Adamkin; Prakesh S Shah Journal: J Perinatol Date: 2020-03-25 Impact factor: 2.521
Authors: Miguel Saenz de Pipaon; Izaskun Dorronsoro; Laura Álvarez-Cuervo; Nancy F Butte; Rosario Madero; Vicente Barrios; Juan Coya; Miriam Martínez-Biarge; Gabriel Á Martos-Moreno; Mary S Fewtrell; Jesús Argente; José Quero Journal: Pediatr Res Date: 2017-07-05 Impact factor: 3.756
Authors: Zoya Gridneva; Anna R Hepworth; Leigh C Ward; Ching T Lai; Peter E Hartmann; Donna T Geddes Journal: Pediatr Res Date: 2016-11-09 Impact factor: 3.756