Scolaris Content Display Scolaris Content Display

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Prebiotics for the prevention of hyperbilirubinaemia in neonates

Information

DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD012731.pub2Copy DOI
Database:
  1. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
Version published:
  1. 13 August 2019see what's new
Type:
  1. Intervention
Stage:
  1. Review
Cochrane Editorial Group:
  1. Cochrane Neonatal Group

Copyright:
  1. Copyright © 2019 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Article metrics

Altmetric:

Cited by:

Cited 0 times via Crossref Cited-by Linking

Collapse

Authors

  • Amir Mohammad Armanian

    Correspondence to: Division of Neonatology, Child Growth and Development Research Center, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran

    [email protected]

  • Shayesteh Jahanfar

    School of Health Sciences, Central Michigan University, Mount Pleasant, USA

  • Awat Feizi

    Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Health, Endocrinology and Metabolism Research Center, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran

  • Nima Salehimehr

    Department of Psychology, Almahdi Mehr Higher Education Institute, Isfahan, Iran

  • Mitra Molaeinezhad

    Behavioral sciences Research Centre, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran

  • Erfan Sadeghi

    Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Health, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran

Contributions of authors

Dr. Armanian initiated and designed the review. Dr. Armanian, Dr. Feizi, Dr. Sadeghi, and Dr. Salehimehr reviewed the literature and wrote the review. Dr. Molaeinezhad assisted in review of the literature and in writing process of the protocol only. All stages of design and writing of the review were performed under the guidance of Dr. Jahanfar. Dr. Jahanfar also helped with data analysis and write up of the review.

Sources of support

Internal sources

  • Division of Neonatology, Child Growth and Development Research Center, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Iran.

External sources

  • Vermont Oxford Network, USA.

    Cochrane Neonatal Reviews are produced with support from Vermont Oxford Network, a worldwide collaboration of health professionals dedicated to providing evidence‐based care of the highest quality for newborn infants and their families.

Declarations of interest

None to declare.

Acknowledgements

We acknowledge the opportunities provided by our institution (Isfahan University of Medical Sciences) to write this review.

The methods section of this review is based on a standard template used by Cochrane Neonatal.

Version history

Published

Title

Stage

Authors

Version

2019 Aug 13

Prebiotics for the prevention of hyperbilirubinaemia in neonates

Review

Amir Mohammad Armanian, Shayesteh Jahanfar, Awat Feizi, Nima Salehimehr, Mitra Molaeinezhad, Erfan Sadeghi

https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD012731.pub2

2017 Jul 20

Prebiotics for the prevention of hyperbilirubinaemia in neonates

Protocol

Amir Mohammad Armanian, Shayesteh Jahanfar, Awat Feizi, Mitra Molaeinezhad, Nima Salehimehr, Erfan Sadeghi

https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD012731

Differences between protocol and review

Due to the very few articles that were found:

In protocol: Investigators must compare prebiotics with enteral supplementation of milk with distilled water, no supplementation, or both.

In review: Investigators must compare effects of feeding supplementation with prebiotics on neonatal hyperbilirubinaemia with supplementation of milk with any other placebo (particularly distilled water) or no supplementation.

Keywords

MeSH

PICOs

Population
Intervention
Comparison
Outcome

The PICO model is widely used and taught in evidence-based health care as a strategy for formulating questions and search strategies and for characterizing clinical studies or meta-analyses. PICO stands for four different potential components of a clinical question: Patient, Population or Problem; Intervention; Comparison; Outcome.

See more on using PICO in the Cochrane Handbook.

Guidelines for phototherapy in infants at ≥ 35 weeks' gestation. (American Academy of Pediatrics Subcommittee on Hyperbilirubinaemia. Management of hyperbilirubinaemia in the newborn infant 35 or more weeks of gestation. Pediatrics 2004;114:297.)
Figures and Tables -
Figure 1

Guidelines for phototherapy in infants at ≥ 35 weeks' gestation. 

(American Academy of Pediatrics Subcommittee on Hyperbilirubinaemia. Management of hyperbilirubinaemia in the newborn infant 35 or more weeks of gestation. Pediatrics 2004;114:297.)

Suggested guidelines for initiating phototherapy or exchange transfusion in preterm infants (< 35 weeks' gestation).(Maisels MJ, Watchko JF, Bhutani VK, et al. An approach to the management of hyperbilirubinaemia in the preterm infant less than 35 weeks of gestation. Journal of Perinatology 2012;32:660‐664.)
Figures and Tables -
Figure 2

Suggested guidelines for initiating phototherapy or exchange transfusion in preterm infants (< 35 weeks' gestation).

(Maisels MJ, Watchko JF, Bhutani VK, et al. An approach to the management of hyperbilirubinaemia in the preterm infant less than 35 weeks of gestation. Journal of Perinatology 2012;32:660‐664.)

Study flow diagram.
Figures and Tables -
Figure 3

Study flow diagram.

Risk of bias summary: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item for each included study.
Figures and Tables -
Figure 4

Risk of bias summary: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item for each included study.

Risk of bias graph: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item presented as percentages across all included studies.
Figures and Tables -
Figure 5

Risk of bias graph: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item presented as percentages across all included studies.

Comparison 1 Feeding supplementation with prebiotics versus no prebiotics, Outcome 1 Incidence of hyperbilirubinaemia.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.1

Comparison 1 Feeding supplementation with prebiotics versus no prebiotics, Outcome 1 Incidence of hyperbilirubinaemia.

Comparison 1 Feeding supplementation with prebiotics versus no prebiotics, Outcome 2 Maximum plasma unconjugated bilirubin levels.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.2

Comparison 1 Feeding supplementation with prebiotics versus no prebiotics, Outcome 2 Maximum plasma unconjugated bilirubin levels.

Comparison 1 Feeding supplementation with prebiotics versus no prebiotics, Outcome 3 Maximum plasma unconjugated bilirubin levels.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.3

Comparison 1 Feeding supplementation with prebiotics versus no prebiotics, Outcome 3 Maximum plasma unconjugated bilirubin levels.

Comparison 1 Feeding supplementation with prebiotics versus no prebiotics, Outcome 4 Treatment with phototherapy.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.4

Comparison 1 Feeding supplementation with prebiotics versus no prebiotics, Outcome 4 Treatment with phototherapy.

Comparison 1 Feeding supplementation with prebiotics versus no prebiotics, Outcome 5 Stool frequency: gestational age.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.5

Comparison 1 Feeding supplementation with prebiotics versus no prebiotics, Outcome 5 Stool frequency: gestational age.

Comparison 1 Feeding supplementation with prebiotics versus no prebiotics, Outcome 6 Stool frequency: birth weight.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.6

Comparison 1 Feeding supplementation with prebiotics versus no prebiotics, Outcome 6 Stool frequency: birth weight.

Comparison 1 Feeding supplementation with prebiotics versus no prebiotics, Outcome 7 Stool frequency: type of prebiotic.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.7

Comparison 1 Feeding supplementation with prebiotics versus no prebiotics, Outcome 7 Stool frequency: type of prebiotic.

Comparison 1 Feeding supplementation with prebiotics versus no prebiotics, Outcome 8 Stool frequency: type of feeding.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.8

Comparison 1 Feeding supplementation with prebiotics versus no prebiotics, Outcome 8 Stool frequency: type of feeding.

Comparison 1 Feeding supplementation with prebiotics versus no prebiotics, Outcome 9 Duration of phototherapy (days).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.9

Comparison 1 Feeding supplementation with prebiotics versus no prebiotics, Outcome 9 Duration of phototherapy (days).

Comparison 1 Feeding supplementation with prebiotics versus no prebiotics, Outcome 10 Length of hospital stay (days).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.10

Comparison 1 Feeding supplementation with prebiotics versus no prebiotics, Outcome 10 Length of hospital stay (days).

Comparison 1 Feeding supplementation with prebiotics versus no prebiotics, Outcome 11 Length of hospital stay (days).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.11

Comparison 1 Feeding supplementation with prebiotics versus no prebiotics, Outcome 11 Length of hospital stay (days).

Comparison 1 Feeding supplementation with prebiotics versus no prebiotics, Outcome 12 Neonatal mortality.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.12

Comparison 1 Feeding supplementation with prebiotics versus no prebiotics, Outcome 12 Neonatal mortality.

Comparison 1 Feeding supplementation with prebiotics versus no prebiotics, Outcome 13 Neonatal mortality.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.13

Comparison 1 Feeding supplementation with prebiotics versus no prebiotics, Outcome 13 Neonatal mortality.

Summary of findings for the main comparison. Feeding supplementation with prebiotics compared to no prebiotics for the prevention of hyperbilirubinaemia in neonates

Feeding supplementation with prebiotics compared to no prebiotics for the prevention of hyperbilirubinaemia in neonates

Patient or population: Neonates, including term neonates (gestational age ≥ 37 weeks), late preterm neonates (35 to 37 weeks' gestation) and preterm neonates (< 35 weeks' gestation)
Setting: Neonatal Intensive Care Units
Intervention: Feeding supplementation with prebiotics
Comparison: Distilled water/placebo or no supplementation

Outcomes

Anticipated absolute effects* (95% CI)

Relative effect
(95% CI)

№ of participants
(studies)

Certainty of the evidence
(GRADE)

Comments

Risk with no prebiotics

Risk with Feeding supplementation with prebiotics

Incidence of hyperbilirubinaemia

Study population

RR 0.75
(0.58 to 0.97)

50
(1 RCT)

⊕⊕⊝⊝
LOW a b

960 per 1,000

720 per 1,000
(557 to 931)

Maximum plasma unconjugated bilirubin levels;
assessed with: mg/dL
Scale from: 1 to 25

The mean maximum plasma unconjugated bilirubin levels; ranged from 7.6 to 8.1 mg/dL

MD 0.14 mg/dL higher
(0.91 lower to 1.2 higher)

78
(2 RCTs)

⊕⊕⊝⊝
LOW a c

Treatment with phototherapy

Study population

RR 0.75
(0.58 to 0.97)

50
(1 RCT)

⊕⊕⊝⊝
LOW a b

960 per 1,000

720 per 1,000
(557 to 931)

Stool frequency

The mean stool frequency; ranged from 1 to 3

MD 1.18 higher
(0.9 higher to 1.46 higher)

154
(3 RCTs)

⊕⊕⊕⊕
HIGH

Duration of phototherapy (days)

The mean duration of phototherapy (days); ranged from 2 to 3 days

MD 0.1 days higher
(2 lower to 2.2 higher)

28
(1 RCT)

⊕⊕⊝⊝
LOW b d

Length of hospital stay (days)

The mean length of hospital stay (days); ranged from 29 to 72 days

MD 10.57 days lower
(17.81 lower to 3.33 lower)

78
(2 RCTs)

⊕⊕⊝⊝
LOW a c

Neonatal mortality

Study population

RR 0.94
(0.14 to 6.19)

78
(2 RCTs)

⊕⊕⊝⊝
LOW a c

26 per 1,000

25 per 1,000
(4 to 163)

Acute bilirubin encephalopathy (encephalopathy)

Study population

not estimable

(0 RCTs)

None of the included studies showed any acute bilirubin encephalopathy.

0 per 1,000

0 per 1,000
(0 to 0)

Exchange transfusion (exchange)

Study population

not estimable

(0 RCTs)

There were no reports of the need for exchange transfusion in included studies.

0 per 1,000

0 per 1,000
(0 to 0)

Chronic bilirubin encephalopathy or kernicterus (kernicterus)

Study population

not estimable

(0 RCTs)

There were no reports of the incidence of chronic bilirubin encephalopathy in included studies.

0 per 1,000

0 per 1,000
(0 to 0)

Major neurodevelopmental disability

Study population

not estimable

(0 RCTs)

Major neurodevelopmental disability was not reported in any of the included studies.

0 per 1,000

0 per 1,000
(0 to 0)

Side effects

Study population

not estimable

(0 RCTs)

No side effects were reported in any of the included studies.

0 per 1,000

0 per 1,000
(0 to 0)

*The risk in the intervention group (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI).

CI: Confidence interval; RR: Risk ratio; OR: Odds ratio;

GRADE Working Group grades of evidence
High certainty: We are very confident that the true effect lies close to that of the estimate of the effect
Moderate certainty: We are moderately confident in the effect estimate: The true effect is likely to be close to the estimate of the effect, but there is a possibility that it is substantially different
Low certainty: Our confidence in the effect estimate is limited: The true effect may be substantially different from the estimate of the effect
Very low certainty: We have very little confidence in the effect estimate: The true effect is likely to be substantially different from the estimate of effect

a Downgraded one level due to high risk of performance bias

b Downgraded one level due to uncertainty about precision (one study)

c Downgraded one level due to uncertainty about precision (small study)

d Downgraded one level due to unclear risk of attrition bias (incomplete outcome data)

Figures and Tables -
Summary of findings for the main comparison. Feeding supplementation with prebiotics compared to no prebiotics for the prevention of hyperbilirubinaemia in neonates
Comparison 1. Feeding supplementation with prebiotics versus no prebiotics

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Incidence of hyperbilirubinaemia Show forest plot

1

50

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.75 [0.58, 0.97]

1.1 gestational age preterm neonates (< 35 weeks' gestation); birth weight ( < 1500 grams); type of prebiotic (oligosaccharide); type of feeding (only breast milk‐fed infants)

1

50

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.75 [0.58, 0.97]

2 Maximum plasma unconjugated bilirubin levels Show forest plot

2

78

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.14 [‐0.91, 1.20]

2.1 gestational age preterm neonates (< 35 weeks' gestation), birth weight ( < 1500 grams)

2

78

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.14 [‐0.91, 1.20]

3 Maximum plasma unconjugated bilirubin levels Show forest plot

2

78

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.14 [‐0.91, 1.20]

3.1 breastfed only infants, oligosaccharide

1

50

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.90 [‐2.28, 0.48]

3.2 given a mixed form of feeding, lactulose

1

28

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.60 [‐0.03, 3.23]

4 Treatment with phototherapy Show forest plot

1

50

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.75 [0.58, 0.97]

4.1 gestational age preterm neonates (< 35 weeks' gestation); birth weight ( < 1500 grams); type of prebiotic (oligosaccharide); type of feeding (only breast milk‐fed infants)

1

50

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.75 [0.58, 0.97]

5 Stool frequency: gestational age Show forest plot

3

154

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.18 [0.90, 1.46]

5.1 term neonates (gestational age ≥ 37 weeks)

1

76

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.7 [1.34, 2.06]

5.2 preterm neonates (< 35 weeks' gestation)

2

78

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.4 [‐0.05, 0.85]

6 Stool frequency: birth weight Show forest plot

3

154

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.18 [0.90, 1.46]

6.1 infants ≥ 2500 grams

1

76

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.7 [1.34, 2.06]

6.2 infants < 1500 grams

2

78

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.4 [‐0.05, 0.85]

7 Stool frequency: type of prebiotic Show forest plot

3

154

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.18 [0.90, 1.46]

7.1 oligosaccharide

2

126

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.28 [0.98, 1.58]

7.2 lactulose

1

28

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.40 [‐0.44, 1.24]

8 Stool frequency: type of feeding Show forest plot

3

154

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.18 [0.90, 1.46]

8.1 breastfed only infants

1

50

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.40 [‐0.13, 0.93]

8.2 formula‐fed only infants

1

76

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.7 [1.34, 2.06]

8.3 given a mixed form of feeding

1

28

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.40 [‐0.44, 1.24]

9 Duration of phototherapy (days) Show forest plot

1

28

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.10 [0.00, 2.20]

9.1 gestational age preterm neonates (< 35 weeks' gestation); birth weight ( < 1500 grams); type of prebiotic (lactulose); type of feeding (infants given a mixed form of feeding)

1

28

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.10 [0.00, 2.20]

10 Length of hospital stay (days) Show forest plot

2

78

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐10.57 [‐17.81, ‐3.33]

10.1 gestational age preterm neonates (< 35 weeks' gestation), birth weight ( < 1500 grams)

2

78

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐10.57 [‐17.81, ‐3.33]

11 Length of hospital stay (days) Show forest plot

2

78

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐10.57 [‐17.81, ‐3.33]

11.1 breastfed only infants, oligosaccharide

1

50

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐10.2 [‐17.59, ‐2.81]

11.2 given a mixed form of feeding, lactulose

1

28

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐19.10 [‐54.58, 16.38]

12 Neonatal mortality Show forest plot

2

78

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.94 [0.14, 6.19]

12.1 gestational age preterm neonates (< 35 weeks' gestation), birth weight ( < 1500 grams)

2

78

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.94 [0.14, 6.19]

13 Neonatal mortality Show forest plot

2

78

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.94 [0.14, 6.19]

13.1 breastfed only infants, oligosaccharide

1

50

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

3.0 [0.13, 70.30]

13.2 given a mixed form of feeding, lactulose

1

28

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.29 [0.01, 6.60]

Figures and Tables -
Comparison 1. Feeding supplementation with prebiotics versus no prebiotics