Scolaris Content Display Scolaris Content Display

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Suplementos de ácidos grasos poliinsaturados de cadena larga para recién nacidos prematuros

Información

DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD000375.pub5Copiar DOI
Base de datos:
  1. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
Versión publicada:
  1. 20 diciembre 2016see what's new
Tipo:
  1. Intervention
Etapa:
  1. Review
Grupo Editorial Cochrane:
  1. Grupo Cochrane de Neonatología

Copyright:
  1. Copyright © 2017 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Cifras del artículo

Altmetric:

Citado por:

Citado 0 veces por enlace Crossref Cited-by

Contraer

Autores

  • Kwi Moon

    Princess Margaret Hospital for Children, Perth, Australia

  • Shripada C Rao

    Centre for Neonatal Research and Education, King Edward Memorial Hospital for Women and Princess Margaret Hospital for Children, Perth, Western Australia, Australia

  • Sven M Schulzke

    Department of Neonatology, University of Basel Children's Hospital (UKBB), Basel, Switzerland

  • Sanjay K Patole

    School of Paediatrics and Child Health, School of Women's and Infants' Health, University of Western Australia, King Edward Memorial Hospital, Perth, Australia

  • Karen Simmer

    Correspondencia a: Neonatal Care Unit, King Edward Memorial Hospital for Women and Princess Margaret Hospital for Children, Subiaco, Australia

    [email protected]

Contributions of authors

2000 original review:
KS: Design and preparation of protocol, literature search, assessment of eligibility and quality of studies, data extraction and data analysis, writing of manuscript.

2004 review update:
KS: Assessment of eligibility and quality of studies, review of manuscript.
SP: Literature search, assessment of eligibility and quality of studies, data extraction and data analysis, writing of manuscript.

2008 review update:
KS: Review of manuscript, guidance and supervision for planning of the meta‐analysis.
SMS: Literature search, assessment of eligibility and quality of studies, data extraction and data analysis, writing of manuscript.
SP: Literature search, assessment of eligibility and study quality, review of manuscript.

2010 review update:
SMS: Literature search, assessment of eligibility and quality of studies, data extraction and data analysis, writing of manuscript.
SP: Assessment of eligibility and study quality, data extraction, review of manuscript.
KS: Assessment of eligibility and study quality, review of manuscript, guidance and supervision for update of the meta‐analysis.

2016 review update:
SS: Review of the manuscript.
KS: Review of the manuscript.
SP: Review of the manuscript.
SR: Literature search, assessed eligibility and reassessed risk of bias of included studies, shared writing of manuscript.
KM: Literature search, assessed eligibility and reassessed risk of bias of included studies, added study flow diagram, bias graph and table, updated 'Summary of findings' table, shared writing of manuscript.

Sources of support

Internal sources

  • No sources of support supplied

External sources

  • Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, National Institutes of Health, Department of Health and Human Services, USA.

    Editorial support of the Cochrane Neonatal Review Group has been funded with Federal funds from the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development National Institutes of Health, Department of Health and Human Services, USA, under Contract No. HHSN275201600005C

  • National Institute for Health Research, UK.

    Editorial support for Cochrane Neonatal has been funded with funds from a UK National Institute of Health Research Grant (NIHR) Cochrane Programme Grant (13/89/12). The views expressed in this publication are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR, or the UK Department of Health.

Declarations of interest

None.

Acknowledgements

We gratefully acknowledge the assistance of Dr Maria Makrides with interpretation of VEP.

We thank Dr Sharon Groh‐Wargo, Dr Deborah Diersen‐Schade, Prof Berthold Koletzko, and Prof Alexandre Lapillonne for provision of additional data and/or clarification of study methodology.

We also thank Ms Marta Rossignoli, librarian at Princess Margaret Hospital, for her valuable help in performing the literature search for the current update (2016).

Editorial support of the Cochrane Neonatal Review Group has been funded with Federal funds from the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development National Institutes of Health, Department of Health and Human Services, USA, under Contract No. HHSN267200603418C.

Version history

Published

Title

Stage

Authors

Version

2016 Dec 20

Longchain polyunsaturated fatty acid supplementation in preterm infants

Review

Kwi Moon, Shripada C Rao, Sven M Schulzke, Sanjay K Patole, Karen Simmer

https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD000375.pub5

2011 Feb 16

Longchain polyunsaturated fatty acid supplementation in preterm infants

Review

Sven M Schulzke, Sanjay K Patole, Karen Simmer

https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD000375.pub4

2008 Jan 23

Longchain polyunsaturated fatty acid supplementation in preterm infants

Review

Karen Simmer, Sven Schulzke, Sanjay Patole

https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD000375.pub3

2004 Jan 26

Longchain polyunsaturated fatty acid supplementation in preterm infants

Review

Karen Simmer, Sanjay Patole

https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD000375.pub2

1998 Oct 15

Longchain polyunsaturated fatty acid supplementation in preterm infants

Review

Karen Simmer

https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD000375

Differences between protocol and review

We added the methodology and plan for 'Summary of findings' tables and GRADE recommendations, which were not included in the original protocol.

Keywords

MeSH

PICO

Population
Intervention
Comparison
Outcome

El uso y la enseñanza del modelo PICO están muy extendidos en el ámbito de la atención sanitaria basada en la evidencia para formular preguntas y estrategias de búsqueda y para caracterizar estudios o metanálisis clínicos. PICO son las siglas en inglés de cuatro posibles componentes de una pregunta de investigación: paciente, población o problema; intervención; comparación; desenlace (outcome).

Para saber más sobre el uso del modelo PICO, puede consultar el Manual Cochrane.

Study flow diagram.
Figuras y tablas -
Figure 1

Study flow diagram.

Risk of bias graph: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item presented as percentages across all included studies.
Figuras y tablas -
Figure 2

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

Forest plot of comparison: 1 Supplement vs control, outcome: 1.6 Visual acuity (log cycles/degree) at 12 months post‐term.
Figuras y tablas -
Figure 3

Forest plot of comparison: 1 Supplement vs control, outcome: 1.6 Visual acuity (log cycles/degree) at 12 months post‐term.

Forest plot of comparison: 1 Supplement vs control, outcome: 1.13 Bayley MDI at 12 months post‐term.
Figuras y tablas -
Figure 4

Forest plot of comparison: 1 Supplement vs control, outcome: 1.13 Bayley MDI at 12 months post‐term.

Forest plot of comparison: 1 Supplement vs control, outcome: 1.14 Bayley PDI at 12 months post‐term.
Figuras y tablas -
Figure 5

Forest plot of comparison: 1 Supplement vs control, outcome: 1.14 Bayley PDI at 12 months post‐term.

Forest plot of comparison: 1 Supplement vs control, outcome: 1.28 Weight at 12 months post‐term (kg).
Figuras y tablas -
Figure 6

Forest plot of comparison: 1 Supplement vs control, outcome: 1.28 Weight at 12 months post‐term (kg).

Forest plot of comparison: 1 Supplement vs control, outcome: 1.29 Length at 12 months post‐term (cm).
Figuras y tablas -
Figure 7

Forest plot of comparison: 1 Supplement vs control, outcome: 1.29 Length at 12 months post‐term (cm).

Forest plot of comparison: 1 Supplement vs control, outcome: 1.30 Head circumference at 12 months post‐term (cm).
Figuras y tablas -
Figure 8

Forest plot of comparison: 1 Supplement vs control, outcome: 1.30 Head circumference at 12 months post‐term (cm).

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 1 Visual acuity (log cycles/degree) at term.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.1

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 1 Visual acuity (log cycles/degree) at term.

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 2 Visual acuity (log cycles/degree) at 2 months post‐term.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.2

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 2 Visual acuity (log cycles/degree) at 2 months post‐term.

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 3 Visual acuity (log cycles/ degree) at 4 months post‐term.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.3

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 3 Visual acuity (log cycles/ degree) at 4 months post‐term.

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 4 Visual acuity (log cycles /degree) at 6 months post‐term.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.4

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 4 Visual acuity (log cycles /degree) at 6 months post‐term.

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 5 Visual acuity (log cycles/degree) at 9 months post‐term.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.5

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 5 Visual acuity (log cycles/degree) at 9 months post‐term.

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 6 Visual acuity (log cycles/degree) at 12 months post‐term.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.6

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 6 Visual acuity (log cycles/degree) at 12 months post‐term.

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 7 Rod ERG at 36 wk PCA.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.7

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 7 Rod ERG at 36 wk PCA.

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 8 ERG at 3 months post‐term, amplitude (uV).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.8

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 8 ERG at 3 months post‐term, amplitude (uV).

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 9 Rod ERG at 4 months post‐term.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.9

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 9 Rod ERG at 4 months post‐term.

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 10 VEP at 3 months post‐term.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.10

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 10 VEP at 3 months post‐term.

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 11 Fagan infant test at 12 months post‐term.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.11

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 11 Fagan infant test at 12 months post‐term.

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 12 Fagan infant test at 9 months post‐term (% total time).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.12

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 12 Fagan infant test at 9 months post‐term (% total time).

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 13 Bayley MDI at 12 months post‐term.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.13

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 13 Bayley MDI at 12 months post‐term.

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 14 Bayley PDI at 12 months post‐term.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.14

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 14 Bayley PDI at 12 months post‐term.

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 15 Weight at 6 wk post‐term (kg).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.15

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 15 Weight at 6 wk post‐term (kg).

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 16 Length at 6 wk post‐term (cm).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.16

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 16 Length at 6 wk post‐term (cm).

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 17 Head circumference at 6 wk post‐term (cm).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.17

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 17 Head circumference at 6 wk post‐term (cm).

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 18 Weight at term (kg).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.18

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 18 Weight at term (kg).

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 19 Length at term (cm).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.19

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 19 Length at term (cm).

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 20 Head circ at term (cm).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.20

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 20 Head circ at term (cm).

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 21 Weight at 2 months post‐term (kg).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.21

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 21 Weight at 2 months post‐term (kg).

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 22 Length at 2 months post‐term (cm).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.22

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 22 Length at 2 months post‐term (cm).

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 23 Head circumference at 2 months post‐term (cm).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.23

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 23 Head circumference at 2 months post‐term (cm).

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 24 Growth rate until 3 months post‐term.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.24

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 24 Growth rate until 3 months post‐term.

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 25 Weight at 4 months post‐term (kg).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.25

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 25 Weight at 4 months post‐term (kg).

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 26 Length at 4 months post‐term (cm).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.26

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 26 Length at 4 months post‐term (cm).

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 27 Head circumference at 4 months post‐term (cm).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.27

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 27 Head circumference at 4 months post‐term (cm).

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 28 Weight at 12 months post‐term (kg).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.28

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 28 Weight at 12 months post‐term (kg).

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 29 Length at 12 months post‐term (cm).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.29

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 29 Length at 12 months post‐term (cm).

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 30 Head circumference at 12 months post‐term (cm).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.30

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 30 Head circumference at 12 months post‐term (cm).

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 31 Normalised weight at 12 months post‐term.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.31

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 31 Normalised weight at 12 months post‐term.

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 32 Normalised length at 12 months post‐term.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.32

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 32 Normalised length at 12 months post‐term.

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 33 Normalised head circumference at 12 months post‐term.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.33

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 33 Normalised head circumference at 12 months post‐term.

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 34 Lipid peroxidation (TBARS ‐azide/+azide x 100%), 4 months post‐term.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.34

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 34 Lipid peroxidation (TBARS ‐azide/+azide x 100%), 4 months post‐term.

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 35 RBC fragility (hemolysis with 8% to 10% H2O2) , 4 months post‐term.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.35

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 35 RBC fragility (hemolysis with 8% to 10% H2O2) , 4 months post‐term.

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 36 Infant bleeding time 4 months post‐term (ped device, min).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.36

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 36 Infant bleeding time 4 months post‐term (ped device, min).

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 37 Bayley MDI at 18 months post‐term.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.37

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 37 Bayley MDI at 18 months post‐term.

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 38 Bayley PDI at 18 months post‐term.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.38

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 38 Bayley PDI at 18 months post‐term.

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 39 KPS Developmental Screening Inventory at 9 months post‐term (overall quotient).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.39

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 39 KPS Developmental Screening Inventory at 9 months post‐term (overall quotient).

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 40 Weight at 9 months post‐term.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.40

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 40 Weight at 9 months post‐term.

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 41 Length at 9 months post‐term.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.41

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 41 Length at 9 months post‐term.

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 42 Head circumference at 9 months post‐term.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.42

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 42 Head circumference at 9 months post‐term.

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 43 Normailsed weight at 9 months post‐term.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.43

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 43 Normailsed weight at 9 months post‐term.

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 44 Normalised length at 9 months post‐term.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.44

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 44 Normalised length at 9 months post‐term.

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 45 Normalised head circumference at 9 months post‐term.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.45

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 45 Normalised head circumference at 9 months post‐term.

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 46 Weight at 18 months post‐term.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.46

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 46 Weight at 18 months post‐term.

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 47 Length at 18 months post‐term.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.47

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 47 Length at 18 months post‐term.

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 48 Head circumference at 18 months post‐term.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.48

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 48 Head circumference at 18 months post‐term.

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 49 Normalised weight at 18 months post‐term.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.49

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 49 Normalised weight at 18 months post‐term.

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 50 Normalised length at 18 months post‐term.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.50

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 50 Normalised length at 18 months post‐term.

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 51 Normalised head circumference at 18 months post‐term.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.51

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 51 Normalised head circumference at 18 months post‐term.

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 52 Fagan Infant test at 6m post‐term, novelty time (%total time).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.52

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 52 Fagan Infant test at 6m post‐term, novelty time (%total time).

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 53 MacArthur Communicative Inventories at 14 months post‐term.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.53

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 53 MacArthur Communicative Inventories at 14 months post‐term.

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 54 Bayley MDI at 24 months post‐term.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.54

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 54 Bayley MDI at 24 months post‐term.

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 55 Bayley PDI at 24 months post‐term.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.55

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 55 Bayley PDI at 24 months post‐term.

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 56 Weight at 10 years.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.56

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 56 Weight at 10 years.

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 57 Height at 10 years.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.57

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 57 Height at 10 years.

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 58 Head circumference at 10 years.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.58

Comparison 1 Supplement vs control, Outcome 58 Head circumference at 10 years.

LCPUFA supplemented formula compared with standard formula for clinical outcomes (visual function, neurodevelopment and physical growth)

Patient or population: Preterm infants on enteral feed

Settings: Neonatal Intensive Care Units

Intervention: LCPUFA supplemented formula

Comparison: Standard Formula

Outcomes

Illustrative comparative risks* (95% CI)

Relative effect
(95% CI)

No of Participants
(studies)

Quality of the evidence
(GRADE)

Comments

Assumed risk

Corresponding risk

Standard milk formula

LCPUFA supplemented milk formula

Visual acuity at 12 months post‐term (log/cycles/degree)

Data could not be pooled

Data could not be pooled

NA

82

⊕⊕⊝⊝
Low

Downgraded 2 levels due to very small sample, unclear random sequence generation in one of the RCTs. Meta‐analysis could not be performed.

Bayley MDI at 12 months post‐term

The mean MDI ranged across control groups from
90.5 to 111.5

The mean MDI ranged across the intervention groups from 92 to 110.1

MD: 0.96 (95% CI: −1.42 to 3.34)

364
(4 RCTs)

⊕⊕⊝⊝
Low

Downgraded 2 levels. Reasons: small sample, unclear allocation concealment and random sequence generation in 2 of the RCTs, and very small effect size (MD) and high statistical heterogeneity (I² = 71%)

Bayley PDI at 12 months post‐term

The mean PDI ranged across control groups from 86.3 to 102.1

The mean PDI ranged across the intervention groups from 82.2 to 98

MD: 0.23 (95% CI: ‐2.77 to 3.22)

353 (4 RCTs)

⊕⊕⊝⊝
Low

Downgraded 2 levels. Reasons: small sample, unclear risk of allocation concealment in 2 of the RCTs. Very small effect size (MD) and high statistical heterogeneity (I² = 81%).

Weight at 12 months post‐term (kg)

The mean weight ranged across control groups from 8.85 kg to 9.62 kg

The mean weight ranged across the intervention groups from 9.02 kg to 9.36 kg

MD: −0.10 (95% CI: −0.31 to 0.12)

271 (4 RCTs)

⊕⊕⊝⊝
Low

Downgraded 2 levels. Reasons: small sample, high or unclear risk of attrition bias in 3 studies and unclear method of randomisation in 1 study. Very small effect size (MD) and high statistical heterogeneity (I² = 65%)

Length at 12 months post‐term (cm)

The mean length ranged across control groups from 73.2 cm to 74.6 cm

The mean length ranged across the intervention groups from 73.1 cm to 75.5 cm

MD: 0.25 (CI: −0.33 to 0.84)

271 (4 RCTs)

⊕⊕⊝⊝
Low

Downgraded 2 levels. Reasons: small sample, high or unclear risk of attrition bias in 3 included studies and unclear method of randomisation in 1 study. Very small effect size (MD) and high statistical heterogeneity (I² = 71%)

Head circumference at 12 months post‐term (cm)

The mean head circumference ranged across control group from 45.8 cm to 46.43 cm

The mean head circumference ranged across the intervention groups from 45.9 cm to 46.31 cm

MD: −0.15 (CI: −0.53 to 0.23)

271 (4 RCTs)

⊕⊕⊝⊝
Low

Downgraded 2 levels. Reasons: small sample, high or unclear risk of attrition bias in 3 included studies and unclear method of randomisation in one study. Very small effect size (MD).

*The basis for the assumed risk (e.g. the median control group risk across studies) is provided in footnotes. The corresponding risk (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

GRADE Working Group grades of evidence
High quality: Further research is very unlikely to change our confidence in the estimate of effect.
Moderate quality: Further research is likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and may change the estimate.
Low quality: Further research is very likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and is likely to change the estimate.
Very low quality: We are very uncertain about the estimate.

Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 1. Supplement vs control

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Visual acuity (log cycles/degree) at term Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

1.1 no BPD

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

1.2 BPD

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

2 Visual acuity (log cycles/degree) at 2 months post‐term Show forest plot

3

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

2.1 no BPD

3

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

2.2 BPD

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3 Visual acuity (log cycles/ degree) at 4 months post‐term Show forest plot

3

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

3.1 no BPD

3

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3.2 BPD

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

4 Visual acuity (log cycles /degree) at 6 months post‐term Show forest plot

2

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

4.1 no BPD

2

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

4.2 BPD

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

5 Visual acuity (log cycles/degree) at 9 months post‐term Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

5.1 no BPD

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

5.2 BPD

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

6 Visual acuity (log cycles/degree) at 12 months post‐term Show forest plot

2

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

6.1 no BPD

2

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

6.2 BPD

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

7 Rod ERG at 36 wk PCA Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

7.1 log threshold (scot td‐sec)

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

7.2 log Vmax (uV)

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

8 ERG at 3 months post‐term, amplitude (uV) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

9 Rod ERG at 4 months post‐term Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

9.1 log threshold (scot td‐sec)

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

9.2 log Vmax (uV)

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

10 VEP at 3 months post‐term Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

10.1 N4 latency (millisec)

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

10.2 P4 latency (millisec)

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

11 Fagan infant test at 12 months post‐term Show forest plot

2

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Subtotals only

11.1 novelty time (% total time)

2

84

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐4.11 [‐7.47, ‐0.76]

11.2 total looks (n)

2

84

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

5.52 [2.16, 8.87]

11.3 time/look (sec)

2

84

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.09 [‐0.21, 0.02]

12 Fagan infant test at 9 months post‐term (% total time) Show forest plot

2

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Subtotals only

12.1 novelty time (%)

2

232

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.42 [‐1.40, 2.24]

12.2 total looks (n)

1

51

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

7.20 [2.49, 11.91]

12.3 time/look (sec)

1

51

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.13 [‐0.29, 0.03]

13 Bayley MDI at 12 months post‐term Show forest plot

4

364

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.96 [‐1.42, 3.34]

14 Bayley PDI at 12 months post‐term Show forest plot

4

353

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.23 [‐2.77, 3.22]

15 Weight at 6 wk post‐term (kg) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Subtotals only

16 Length at 6 wk post‐term (cm) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Subtotals only

17 Head circumference at 6 wk post‐term (cm) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Subtotals only

18 Weight at term (kg) Show forest plot

4

296

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.05 [‐0.07, 0.16]

19 Length at term (cm) Show forest plot

4

295

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.34 [‐0.27, 0.96]

20 Head circ at term (cm) Show forest plot

3

185

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.18 [‐0.26, 0.62]

21 Weight at 2 months post‐term (kg) Show forest plot

5

485

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.21 [0.08, 0.33]

22 Length at 2 months post‐term (cm) Show forest plot

4

297

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.47 [0.00, 0.94]

23 Head circumference at 2 months post‐term (cm) Show forest plot

3

187

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.03 [‐0.33, 0.38]

24 Growth rate until 3 months post‐term Show forest plot

1

138

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.00 [‐0.04, 0.04]

24.1 weight g/d

1

46

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.60 [‐3.56, 2.36]

24.2 length cm/w

1

46

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [‐0.06, 0.06]

24.3 head circumference cm/w

1

46

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [‐0.06, 0.06]

25 Weight at 4 months post‐term (kg) Show forest plot

6

489

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.14 [‐0.01, 0.29]

26 Length at 4 months post‐term (cm) Show forest plot

5

299

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.31 [‐0.22, 0.84]

27 Head circumference at 4 months post‐term (cm) Show forest plot

4

198

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.09 [‐0.48, 0.30]

28 Weight at 12 months post‐term (kg) Show forest plot

4

271

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.10 [‐0.31, 0.12]

29 Length at 12 months post‐term (cm) Show forest plot

4

271

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.25 [‐0.33, 0.84]

30 Head circumference at 12 months post‐term (cm) Show forest plot

4

271

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.15 [‐0.53, 0.23]

31 Normalised weight at 12 months post‐term Show forest plot

2

116

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.33 [‐0.56, ‐0.09]

32 Normalised length at 12 months post‐term Show forest plot

2

116

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.03 [‐0.16, 0.22]

33 Normalised head circumference at 12 months post‐term Show forest plot

2

116

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.14 [‐0.38, 0.10]

34 Lipid peroxidation (TBARS ‐azide/+azide x 100%), 4 months post‐term Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

35 RBC fragility (hemolysis with 8% to 10% H2O2) , 4 months post‐term Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

36 Infant bleeding time 4 months post‐term (ped device, min) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

37 Bayley MDI at 18 months post‐term Show forest plot

3

494

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

2.40 [‐0.33, 5.12]

38 Bayley PDI at 18 months post‐term Show forest plot

3

496

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.74 [‐1.90, 3.37]

39 KPS Developmental Screening Inventory at 9 months post‐term (overall quotient) Show forest plot

1

158

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.50 [‐1.70, 4.70]

40 Weight at 9 months post‐term Show forest plot

2

374

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.01 [‐0.22, 0.21]

41 Length at 9 months post‐term Show forest plot

2

374

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.02 [‐0.58, 0.61]

42 Head circumference at 9 months post‐term Show forest plot

2

374

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.03 [‐0.37, 0.30]

43 Normailsed weight at 9 months post‐term Show forest plot

1

158

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.35 [‐0.72, 0.02]

44 Normalised length at 9 months post‐term Show forest plot

1

158

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.3 [‐0.69, 0.09]

45 Normalised head circumference at 9 months post‐term Show forest plot

1

158

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.10 [‐0.51, 0.31]

46 Weight at 18 months post‐term Show forest plot

2

396

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.14 [‐0.39, 0.10]

47 Length at 18 months post‐term Show forest plot

2

396

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.28 [‐0.91, 0.35]

48 Head circumference at 18 months post‐term Show forest plot

2

396

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.18 [‐0.53, 0.18]

49 Normalised weight at 18 months post‐term Show forest plot

1

158

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.33 [‐0.68, 0.02]

50 Normalised length at 18 months post‐term Show forest plot

1

158

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.44 [‐0.80, ‐0.08]

51 Normalised head circumference at 18 months post‐term Show forest plot

1

158

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.10 [‐0.52, 0.32]

52 Fagan Infant test at 6m post‐term, novelty time (%total time) Show forest plot

1

187

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.5 [‐2.64, 1.64]

53 MacArthur Communicative Inventories at 14 months post‐term Show forest plot

1

399

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.34 [‐3.05, 3.72]

53.1 vocab comprehension scores

1

199

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.70 [‐2.96, 6.36]

53.2 vocab production scores

1

200

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐1.20 [‐6.14, 3.74]

54 Bayley MDI at 24 months post‐term Show forest plot

1

42

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

4.10 [‐8.06, 16.26]

55 Bayley PDI at 24 months post‐term Show forest plot

1

42

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐3.60 [‐12.11, 4.91]

56 Weight at 10 years Show forest plot

1

107

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

2.30 [‐1.45, 6.06]

56.1 boys

1

51

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐1.43 [‐7.08, 4.22]

56.2 girls

1

56

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

5.26 [0.23, 10.29]

57 Height at 10 years Show forest plot

1

107

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

2.38 [‐0.27, 5.03]

57.1 boys

1

51

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [‐4.43, 4.43]

57.2 girls

1

56

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

3.70 [0.39, 7.01]

58 Head circumference at 10 years Show forest plot

1

107

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.43 [‐0.32, 1.17]

58.1 boys

1

51

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.5 [‐1.65, 0.65]

58.2 girls

1

56

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.10 [0.12, 2.08]

Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 1. Supplement vs control