The evidence available from r and omised controlled trials suggested that delaying the introduction of progressive enteral feeds beyond four days after birth did not reduce the risk of developing NEC in very preterm or VLBW infants , including growth-restricted infants .
Delaying the introduction of progressive enteral feeds result ed in a few days ' delay in establishing full enteral feeds but the clinical importance of this effect was unclear .
BACKGROUND The introduction of enteral feeds for very preterm ( less than 32 weeks ' gestation ) or very low birth weight ( VLBW ; less than 1500 g ) infants is often delayed for several days or longer after birth due to concern that early introduction may not be tolerated and may increase the risk of necrotising enterocolitis ( NEC ) .
However , delaying enteral feeding could diminish the functional adaptation of the gastrointestinal tract and prolong the need for parenteral nutrition with its attendant infectious and metabolic risks .
OBJECTIVES To determine the effect of delayed introduction of progressive enteral feeds on the incidence of NEC , mortality and other morbidities in very preterm or VLBW infants .
Parenteral nutrition compared with transpyloric feeding.
Fifty nine infants of birthweight less than 1500 g were allocated alternately to initial total parenteral nutrition or to transpyloric feeding .  Mortality was similar between the two groups . Ten of the 29 infants in the transpyloric group failed to establish full enteral nutrition during the first week of life . No beneficial effects on growth were shown in infants receiving parenteral nutrition . Acquired bacterial infection was higher in the parenteral group and associated with morbidity and mortality . Conjugated hyperbilirubinaemia occurred only in the parenterally fed infants . The incidence of necrotising enterocolitis was higher in the transpyloric group . Parenteral nutrition does not confer any appreciable benefit and because of greater complexity and higher risk of complications should be reserved for those infants in whom enteral feeding is impossible
The evidence available from r and omised controlled trials suggested that delaying the introduction of progressive enteral feeds beyond four days after birth did not reduce the risk of developing NEC in very preterm or VLBW infants , including growth-restricted infants .
Delaying the introduction of progressive enteral feeds result ed in a few days ' delay in establishing full enteral feeds but the clinical importance of this effect was unclear .
BACKGROUND The introduction of enteral feeds for very preterm ( less than 32 weeks ' gestation ) or very low birth weight ( VLBW ; less than 1500 g ) infants is often delayed for several days or longer after birth due to concern that early introduction may not be tolerated and may increase the risk of necrotising enterocolitis ( NEC ) .
However , delaying enteral feeding could diminish the functional adaptation of the gastrointestinal tract and prolong the need for parenteral nutrition with its attendant infectious and metabolic risks .
OBJECTIVES To determine the effect of delayed introduction of progressive enteral feeds on the incidence of NEC , mortality and other morbidities in very preterm or VLBW infants .