REVIEW ER 'S CONCLUSIONS There is no evidence to support feeding with a hydrolysed formula for the prevention of allergy in preference to exclusive breast feeding .
In high risk infants who are unable to be completely breast fed , there is evidence that prolonged feeding with a hydrolysed compared to a cow 's milk formula reduces infant and childhood allergy and infant CMA .
BACKGROUND Allergies and food reactions are common and may be associated with foods including adapted cow 's milk formulas .
Formulas containing hydrolysed proteins have been used to treat infants with allergy or food intolerance , and have been advocated for prevention of allergy and food intolerance in infants .
OBJECTIVES To determine whether use of hydrolysed formulas for infant feeding prevents allergy and food intolerance .
If hydrolysed formulas are effective , to determine what type of hydrolysed formula is most effective including extensively and partially hydrolysed formulas .
To determine which infants benefit including infants at low or high risk of allergy and infants receiving early , short term or prolonged formula feeding .
Prospective, controlled, multi-center study on the effect of an amino-acid-based formula in infants with cow's milk allergy/intolerance and atopic dermatitis.
Cow 's milk allergy/intolerance is treated by complete avoidance of cow 's milk proteins . Because cow 's milk is an important food for infants , its avoidance may lead to an increased risk of growth impairment . Whilst there is evidence for the beneficial effects of extensively hydrolyzed cow 's milk formulate ( eHF ) in infants with cow 's milk allergy/intolerance , little is known about the effects of amino-acid-based formulae ( AA ) in such infants . We therefore performed a prospect i ve , controlled , multi-center trial to study the efficacy of AA in comparison with eHF , on the growth and clinical symptoms of 73 infants ( median age 5.7 months ) with cow 's milk allergy/intolerance and atopic dermatitis . Cow 's milk allergy/intolerance was proven in all infants by double-blind , placebo-controlled food-challenge . We observed a significant improvement in the SCORAD index in both groups , from a mean of 24.6 , at entry , to a mean of 10.7 ( p < 0.0001 ) after 6 months . In the AA group there was a significant increase in the length st and ard deviation score ( p < 0.04 ) , whilst there was no difference in the eHF group . The weight-for-length values were stable in both groups . The energy intake during the study was similar in both groups . Both an AA and eHF result ed in a significant clinical improvement in infants with an early onset of symptoms of cow 's milk allergy/intolerance . Feeding an AA result ed in improved growth compared with feeding eHF , despite similar dietary intakes , and may therefore be considered as a beneficial alternative in infants with severe cow 's milk allergy intolerance
REVIEW ER 'S CONCLUSIONS There is no evidence to support feeding with a hydrolysed formula for the prevention of allergy in preference to exclusive breast feeding .
In high risk infants who are unable to be completely breast fed , there is evidence that prolonged feeding with a hydrolysed compared to a cow 's milk formula reduces infant and childhood allergy and infant CMA .
BACKGROUND Allergies and food reactions are common and may be associated with foods including adapted cow 's milk formulas .
Formulas containing hydrolysed proteins have been used to treat infants with allergy or food intolerance , and have been advocated for prevention of allergy and food intolerance in infants .
OBJECTIVES To determine whether use of hydrolysed formulas for infant feeding prevents allergy and food intolerance .
If hydrolysed formulas are effective , to determine what type of hydrolysed formula is most effective including extensively and partially hydrolysed formulas .
To determine which infants benefit including infants at low or high risk of allergy and infants receiving early , short term or prolonged formula feeding .