We found no evidence to support short-term or prolonged feeding with a hydrolysed formula compared with exclusive breast feeding for prevention of allergic disease .
Very low- quality evidence indicates that short-term use of an EHF compared with a CMF may prevent infant CMA .
Further trials are recommended before implementation of this practice .We found no evidence to support prolonged feeding with a hydrolysed formula compared with a CMF for prevention of allergic disease in infants unable to be exclusively breast fed
BACKGROUND Infant formulas containing hydrolysed proteins have been widely advocated for preventing allergic disease in infants , in place of st and ard cow 's milk formula ( CMF ) .
However , it is unclear whether the clinical trial evidence supports this .
OBJECTIVES To compare effects on allergic disease when infants are fed a hydrolysed formula versus CMF or human breast milk .
If hydrolysed formulas are effective , to determine what type of hydrolysed formula is most effective , including extensively or partially hydrolysed formula ( EHF/PHF ) .
To determine whether infants at low or high risk of allergic disease , and whether infants receiving early short-term ( first few days after birth ) or prolonged formula feeding benefit from hydrolysed formulas .
Effect of an allergy prevention programme on incidence of atopic symptoms in infancy
A total of 105 “ high‐risk ” infants born in 1988 were studied prospect ively from birth to 18 months of age . The infants were recommended breastfeeding and /or hypoallergenic formula ( Nutramigen or Profylac ) combined with avoidance of solid foods during the first 6 months of life . All mothers had unrestricted diet . Avoidance of daily exposure to tobacco smoke , furred pets and dust‐collecting material s in the bedroom were advised . This prevention group was compared with a control group consisting of 54 identically defined “ high‐risk ” infants born in 1985 in the same area . All infants had either severe single atopic predisposition combined with cord blood IgE ≥ 0.5 KU/1 or biparental atopic predisposition . The control group had unrestricted diet and was not advised about environmental factors . Apart from the prevention programme and year of birth the prevention group and the control group were comparable . The parents were highly motivated and compliance was good . The rate of participation was 97 % , and 85 % followed the dietary measures strictly . The cumulative prevalence of atopic symptoms was significantly lower at 18 months in the prevention group ( 32 % ) , as compared with the control group ( 74 % ) ( p<0.01 ) , due to reduced prevalence of recurrent wheezing ( 13 % , versus 37 % ; p<0.01 ) , atopic dermatitis ( 14 % versus 31 % ; p<0.01 ) , vomiting/diarrhoea ( 5 % versus 20 % ; p<0.01 ) and infantile colic ( 9 % versus 24 % ; p<0.01 ) . The cumulative prevalence of food allergy was significantly lower in the prevention group ( 6 % versus 17 % ; p<0.05 ) . In both high‐risk groups daily exposure to tobacco smoke increased the risk of recurrent wheezing significantly ( p<0.01 ) . The main difference between the prevention group and the control group was the diet . Thus , feeding with breastmilk and /or hypoallergenic formula combined with avoidance of solid foods until the age of 6 months appeared to reduce the cumulative prevalence of atopic symptoms during the first 18 months of life
We found no evidence to support short-term or prolonged feeding with a hydrolysed formula compared with exclusive breast feeding for prevention of allergic disease .
Very low- quality evidence indicates that short-term use of an EHF compared with a CMF may prevent infant CMA .
Further trials are recommended before implementation of this practice .We found no evidence to support prolonged feeding with a hydrolysed formula compared with a CMF for prevention of allergic disease in infants unable to be exclusively breast fed
BACKGROUND Infant formulas containing hydrolysed proteins have been widely advocated for preventing allergic disease in infants , in place of st and ard cow 's milk formula ( CMF ) .
However , it is unclear whether the clinical trial evidence supports this .
OBJECTIVES To compare effects on allergic disease when infants are fed a hydrolysed formula versus CMF or human breast milk .
If hydrolysed formulas are effective , to determine what type of hydrolysed formula is most effective , including extensively or partially hydrolysed formula ( EHF/PHF ) .
To determine whether infants at low or high risk of allergic disease , and whether infants receiving early short-term ( first few days after birth ) or prolonged formula feeding benefit from hydrolysed formulas .