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 .
Use of hypoallergenic formula in the prevention of atopic disease among Asian children.
OBJECTIVE To determine the effect of a partially hydrolysed formula on genetically predisposed children , with respect to the development of atopic clinical manifestations and in vitro testing of serum IgE levels ( total and milk-specific ) . METHODS One hundred and ten infants were r and omly assigned to receive either partially hydrolysed formula or st and ard infant formula  , and were prospect ively monitored from birth for clinical atopic symptoms and serum IgE levels . RESULTS Eczema occurred less frequently in infants receiving partially hydrolysed formula . This was significant ( P < 0.05 ) at 3 , 6 , 9 , 12 , 18 and 24 months . However , the significance decreased with time , although it almost reached statistical significance at 30 months by the Kaplan-Meier survival function ( log-rank statistic , 3.46 ; P = 0.063 ) . Although wheezing occurred less frequently in infants receiving partially hydrolysed formula , compared to those receiving st and ard infant formula , the difference did not reach statistical significance ( P > 0.05 ) . CONCLUSIONS Exclusive feeding of hypoallergenic milk formula in the first 4 months of life has a protective effect in terms of the development of atopic dermatitis in the first 2 years of life , compared to feeding with cow 's milk formula
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 .