Objective

Small for gestational age (SGA) preterm infants (PT) are at greatest risk for growth failure. Our objective was to assess the impact of an exclusive human milk diet (HUM) on growth velocities and neonatal morbidities from birth to discharge in a SGA population.

Study design

Multicenter, retrospective cohort study, subgroup analysis of SGA PT comparing a cow’s milk diet (CMD) with HUM diet.

Results

At birth 420 PT were classified as SGA (197 CMD group, 223 HUM group). Demographics and anthropometric measurements were similar. HUM group PT showed improvement in length Z score at discharge (p = 0.024) and reduction in necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC) (p = 0.004).

Conclusion

SGA PT fed a HUM diet had significantly decreased incidence of NEC, surgical NEC, and late-onset sepsis. Due to concerns about growth in a HUM diet, it is reassuring SGA infants fed the HUM diet had similar growth to CMD diet with trends toward improvement

Objective

An increasingly common practice is to feed preterm infants a base diet comprising only human milk (HM), usually fortified with a cow's milk (CM)-derived fortifier (CMDF). We evaluated the safety of CMDF in a diet of 100% mother's own milk (MOM) against a HM-derived fortifier (HMDF). To date, this has received little research attention.

Study Design

We reanalyzed a 12-center randomized trial, originally comparing exclusive HM feeding, including MOM, donor milk (DM), and HMDF, versus a CM exposed group fed MOM, preterm formula (PTF), and CMDF1. However, for the current study, we performed a subgroup analysis (n = 114) selecting only infants receiving 100% MOM base diet plus fortification, and fed no DM or PTF. This allowed for an isolated comparison of fortifier type: CMDF versus HMDF to evaluate the primary outcomes: necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC) and a severe morbidity index of NEC surgery or death; and several secondary outcomes.

Results

CMDF and HMDF groups had similar baseline characteristics. CMDF was associated with higher risk of NEC; relative risk (RR) 4.2 (p = 0.038), NEC surgery or death (RR 5.1, p = 0.014); and reduced head circumference gain (p = 0.04).

Conclusions

In neonates fed, as currently recommended with a MOM-based diet, the safety of CMDF when compared to HMDF has been little researched. We conclude that available evidence points to an increase in adverse outcomes with CMDF, including NEC and severe morbidity comprising NEC surgery or death.

Objective

Substantial losses of nutrients may occur during tube (gavage) feeding of fortified human milk. Our objective was to compare the losses of key macronutrients and minerals based on method of fortification and gavage feeding method.

Methods

We used clinically available gavage feeding systems and measured pre- and post-feeding (end-point) nutrient content of calcium (Ca), phosphorus (Phos), protein, and fat. Comparisons were made between continuous, gravity bolus, and 30-minute infusion pump feeding systems, as well as human milk fortified with donor human milk-based and bovine milk-based human milk fortifier using an in vitro model.

Results

Feeding method was significantly associated with fat and Ca losses, with increased losses in continuous feeds. Fat losses in continuous feeds were substantial, with 40 ± 3 % of initial fat lost during the feeding process. After correction for feeding method, human milk fortified with donor milk-based fortifier was associated with significantly less loss of Ca (8 ± 4% vs. 28 ± 4%, p< 0.001), Phos (3 ± 4% vs. 24 ± 4%, p < 0.001), and fat (17 ± 2% vs. 25 ± 2%, p = 0.001) than human milk fortified with a bovine milk-based fortifier (Mean ± SEM).

Background: Necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC) remains a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in very low birthweight (VLBW) infants. Human milk feeding and standardized feeding protocols are protective, but clinical practice varies, particularly in fortifier choice. Whether human milk-derived fortifiers reduce NEC risk compared with cow milk-derived fortifiers remains unclear.

Methods: We conducted a systematic state-of-evidence review and meta-analysis, searching PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus through July 2025. Eligible studies included RCTs and observational cohorts of VLBW infants comparing an exclusive human milk diet (EHMD) including human milk-derived fortifiers to cow milk-derived diets. Two reviewers independently screened and extracted data. Both RCTs and observational studies were included to evaluate consistency of effect estimates across designs and to account for heterogeneity in control group feeding practices. Pooled odds ratios (ORs) with 95% CIs were calculated using a Sidik–Jonkman random-effects model. Sensitivity analyses by study design and exclusion of infant formula from controls were performed.

Results: Twenty studies (five RCTs, 15 observational; n = 6794 infants) met inclusion criteria, most enrolling infants born ≤1250 g. Compared with cow milk-containing diets, EHMD was associated with lower odds of Bell Stage ≥ 2 NEC (OR: 0.59; 95% CI: 0.42, 0.81; p < 0.001; n = 4625) and surgical NEC (OR: 0.43; 95% CI: 0.32, 0.58; p < 0.0001; n = 4754). In direct comparisons of fortifier type with a base diet of human milk, estimates suggested lower odds of Bell Stage ≥ 2 NEC by 35% (OR: 0.65; 95% CI: 0.44, 0.97; p = 0.03, n = 2102) and surgical NEC by 49% (OR: 0.51; 95% CI: 0.26, 0.98; p = 0.04; n = 1659) with human milk-derived fortifiers. Effect estimates were generally consistent across study designs, although precision and statistical significance varied.

Conclusions: EHMD with human milk-derived fortifiers was associated with lower odds of medical and surgical NEC in VLBW infants, with most evidence from infants born ≤1250 g, reflecting current clinical use in the highest-risk population. Although the number and sample sizes of RCTs remain limited, the consistency of effect estimates across both RCTs and observational studies, together with significance of pooled analyses, strengthens confidence in these findings. Pragmatic and registry-based studies using standardized fortification protocols may provide the most efficient pathway to strengthen the evidence base.