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 .
Plasma amino acid concentrations in term-born infants fed a whey predominant or a whey hydrolysate formula.
BACKGROUND Hydrolysates are used in the treatment and prevention of cows milk protein allergy . Hydrolysis might alter the plasma level of amino acids . METHODS Forty-five infants were included in a double-blind prospect i ve study and were r and omized in two groups : one receiving a whey predominant formula ( n = 20 ) and the second group receiving a whey hydrolysate formula ( n = 25 ) . Weight and length gain was evaluated up to the age of 13 weeks , when blood was sample d for determination of fasting plasma amino acids . RESULTS Four infants of the hydrolysate group dropped out because refusal to ingest the formula . Weight and length gain at 13 weeks of age were extremely comparable . Significant differences in plasma concentrations were observed for a number of nonessential and essential amino acids ( p = .035 to .0001 ) . Threonine and lysine were both higher in the hydrolysate group , and aspartic acid , cystine , methionine , tyrosine , phenylalanine , histidine , and arginine were lower in the hydrolysate group . CONCLUSIONS These differences in plasma amino acid levels have to be regarded with care because all concentrations were within normal ranges , with the exception of threonine . Weight and length gain of the hydrolysate and the whey predominant formula were identical
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 .