Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
A Lucas a Medical Research
Council Childhood Nutrition Research Centre, Institute of Child Health,
London WC1N 1EH, b Medical Research Council Dunn Nutrition Unit, Cambridge,
CB4 1XJ
Correspondence to: Professor Lucas
A.Lucas{at}ich.ucl.ac.uk
| |
Abstract |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Objectives:
To determine whether perinatal nutrition
influences cognitive function at 7 1/2 - 8 years in children born
preterm.
Design:
Randomised, blinded nutritional intervention trial. Blinded follow up at 7 1/2 - 8 years.
Setting:
Intervention phase in two neonatal units; follow up in a clinic or school setting.
Subjects:
424 preterm infants who weighed under
1850 g at birth; 360 of those who survived were tested at
7 1/2 - 8 years.
Interventions:
Standard infant formula versus nutrient
enriched preterm formula randomly assigned as sole diet (trial A) or
supplements to maternal milk (trial B) fed for a mean of 1 month.
Main outcome measures:
Intelligence quotient (IQ) at
7 1/2 - 8 years with abbreviated Weschler intelligence scale for
children (revised).
Results:
There was a major sex difference in the
impact of diet. At 7 1/2 - 8 years boys previously fed standard
versus preterm formula as sole diet had a 12.2 point disadvantage (95%
confidence interval 3.7 to 20.6; P<0.01) in verbal IQ. In those with
highest intakes of trial diets corresponding figures were 9.5 point
disadvantage and 14.4 point disadvantage in overall IQ (1.2 to 17.7;
P<0.05) and verbal IQ (5.7 to 23.2; P<0.01). Consequently, more
infants fed term formula had low verbal IQ (<85): 31% versus 14% for
both sexes (P=0.02) and 47% versus 13% in boys P=0.009). There was a
higher incidence of cerebral palsy in those fed term formula; exclusion
of such children did not alter the findings.
Conclusions:
Preterm infants are vulnerable to
suboptimal early nutrition in terms of their cognitive
performance
notably, language based skills
at 7 1/2 - 8 years,
when cognitive scores are highly predictive of adult ones. Our data on
cerebral palsy generate a new hypothesis that suboptimal nutritional
management during a critical or plastic early period of rapid brain
growth could impair functional compensation in those sustaining an
earlier brain insult. Cognitive function, notably in males, may be
permanently impaired by suboptimal neonatal nutrition.
|
Key messages
|
| |
Introduction |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Numerous studies have examined whether suboptimal nutrition in
early life, at a critical or "vulnerable" phase of brain
development, could affect later cognitive function1-6
a
matter of major public health and clinical concern. Most studies have
been in developing countries, where malnutrition is so closely
associated with poverty, poor social circumstances, and lack of
stimulation that it has been difficult to extricate these influences
from any potential long term effect of nutrition
itself.
6 7
While some recent evidence is
compelling,
3 8
firm conclusions are still hampered by the
lack of large studies with adequate experimental design.
Clear demonstration of causal effects of early nutrition on long term neurodevelopment requires an experimental approach with strict randomisation of groups. Experimental studies in animals, mostly rodents,8-10 have shown that nutrition in early life can permanently affect brain structure and function, especially in males. Such studies in animals, however, have uncertain relevance for human cognitive development.
In humans the so called "critical" spurt in brain growth is between
the third trimester and 2 years post-term.5 We have designed a series of randomised prospective studies to test the vulnerability of the brain to suboptimal nutrition during specific periods of this growth spurt. Our most longstanding studies, started in
1982, were on preterm infants
11 12
and therefore designed to test effects of diet in the earliest period of the spurt in brain
growth
before full term. In the early 1980s diets available for
preterm infants varied greatly in nutrient content,11 and it was ethical and feasible to assign these diets randomly as there was
considerable uncertainty on optimal nutritional strategies. Our outcome
studies have direct application for clinical practice13 and provide a unique opportunity to test formally the hypothesis that
nutrition could influence long term cognitive performance.
In 1991 we reported the first of two parallel trials comparing effects
of feeding infants born preterm a standard infant formula or a special
preterm formula enriched with protein, energy, and micronutrients
designed to meet the calculated nutritional needs of preterm infants.
Despite the brevity of the early dietary manipulation
on average only
the first postnatal month12
we reported major reductions in motor and mental development indices at 18 months in the group fed
on standard formula. Test scores at 18 months, however, are not
strongly predictive of later cognitive development.14 We report here results of formal cognitive tests in these children at
7 1/2 - 8 years, when any group differences in intelligence
quotients would be likely to reflect permanent effects of early
diet.15
| |
Methods |
|---|
|
|
|---|
We enrolled infants who weighed under 1850 g at birth and were admitted to the neonatal unit in Norwich throughout 1982-4 and in Sheffield during 1983-4. Ethical approval was obtained in each centre. Parental consent was always sought and was never refused. Only babies with major congenital malformations known to impair growth or development were ineligible.
Randomisation
Randomisation was as shown in figure 1. Infants of mothers who
chose not to provide breast milk were randomly allocated to receive
either a standard term formula (Ostermilk, previously Osterfeed, Farley
Health Products) or a preterm formula designed (by us) to meet the
calculated increased nutritional needs in preterm infants (Osterprem,
Farley Health Products) as their sole diet (trial A). Those babies
whose mothers chose to provide their breast milk were randomly
allocated to receive the term or preterm formula as a supplement to
breast milk (trial B). Intake of trial diet in trial B depended on the
mother's success in providing her milk. The volume of formula and
breast milk (if received) were recorded daily to allow the proportional
consumption of these milks to be calculated over the study. Consumption
of the trial diet varied from none to 100% intake (median 39%;
quartiles 5% and 76%) with no difference between babies supplemented
with term (median 38%) or preterm (41%)
formula.
|
Composition of formulas
The formulas were identified by numeric code so that neonatal
staff, parents, and eventually follow up staff were blinded to dietary
assignment. The composition of the trial formulas is shown in table 1.
The quantity but not quality of protein and fat differed between the
two formulas. The composition of expressed breast milk from daily
analyses of samples from 24 hour milk collections was 1.5 g protein,
3.0 g fat, 7.0 g carbohydrate, 0.259 MJ (62 kcal), 23 mg sodium,
35 mg calcium, and 15 mg phosphorus per 100 ml.
|
Data collected
Extensive demographic, social, clinical, anthropometric, and
biochemical data were collected according to predefined criteria. Social class was coded into six categories (registrar general's classification) and mother's education according to categories published previously.16
Analysis
Data were analysed as randomised in accordance with the trial
protocol and standard practice. Statistical analyses included
Student's t test,
2 test, Fisher's
exact test, and multiple regression. Data from children with cerebral
palsy who could be tested were included in these tests but excluded
from further analyses. A sample size of 288 subjects was calculated at
the outset to detect a 0.33 SD difference (5 points) in overall IQ
between feed groups (A and B combined) at the 5% significance level
with over 80% power. (In fact, the follow up of 360 subjects permitted
a 4.5 point difference to be detected.) For trial A alone a sample size
of 128 subjects was calculated to detect a 0.5 SD difference (7.5 points) in overall IQ (recruitment achieved was slightly higher than
this at 133 subjects). On the basis of our previous follow up of this
cohort, these hypothesised differences were plausible.12
| |
Results |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Table 2 shows characteristics of the study population. The randomised groups did not differ significantly in demographic or clinical characteristics. Those fed preterm formula had greater neonatal weight gain in trials A and B and greater gain in head circumference in trial A. Period spent on the trial diets was similar in both randomised feed groups (median 4 weeks). Detailed analyses showed no differences between groups in trials A, B, or A plus B in total intravenous volume, energy, protein, or lipid.
|
The incidence of intraventricular haemorrhage did not differ between groups. Larger babies were not routinely scanned, and ultrasound data were available for 59% of cases. For trials A plus B 30/126 (24%) babies had documented intraventricular haemorrhage in the standard formula group and 27/124 (22%) in the preterm formula group; for more severe, grade 3 or 4 intraventricular haemorrhage, respective numbers were 11 (8.7%) versus 10 (8.1%). For trial A alone total numbers of babies with intraventricular haemorrhage for the standard versus preterm formula groups were 14/49 (29%) versus 16/48 (33%); and six in each group had grade 3 or 4 haemorrhage.
Measurements of IQ
Table 3 shows performance, verbal, and overall IQ scores at
7 1/2 to 8 years. In trial A verbal IQ was 4.8 points lower
(P=0.8) in those fed solely a standard term formula rather than preterm
formula. The differences in IQ seen between groups in trial A or B or
in trial A plus B combined were not significant (p>0.05). (The higher
IQ of children in trial B, who were fed their own mother's milk,
compared with IQ of those in trial A has been reported
previously.19)
|
|
1.5 to 14.2) point
advantage in overall IQ, whereas no effect was seen in girls (test for
interaction P=0.009 and 0.09, respectively).
|
Children with cerebral palsy and low IQ scores
The analyses above included children with cerebral palsy whose IQ
was measured. In trial A, however, cerebral palsy was significantly
more common among those fed standard rather than preterm formula (8/67
v 1/66; P=0.03 by Fisher's exact test). To explore
whether this imbalance could explain the disadvantageous outcome of
those fed the standard formula, further analyses were performed with
exclusion of data from those children with cerebral palsy. The
disadvantage for the standard formula remained
for example, verbal IQ
in boys fed standard versus preterm formula was 9.7 points lower (95%
confidence interval 1.1 to 18.3; P=0.03).
a difference most pronounced in boys
(54% v 17%; P=0.004). In corresponding analyses for
trials A plus B (n=360; not tabulated) boys and girls were again more likely to be in the category with poor outcome if they had received the
standard versus preterm formula (25% (45/181, including 16 children
with cerebral palsy) versus 16% (29/179, including eight children with
cerebral palsy); P=0.05); the effect was greatest in boys (33% (28/85)
versus 18% (15/83); P=0.027).
|
| |
Discussion |
|---|
|
|
|---|
In this prospective, blinded, randomised outcome trial, with
follow up of 98% of survivors still in Britain, the diet assigned to a
premature baby for an average of just 4 weeks after birth had a
significant effect on IQ
notably verbal IQ in boys
7 1/2 - 8 years later when IQ scores are highly predictive of subsequent ones.14 Our findings suggest that suboptimal early
nutrition in preterm infants can have a permanent effect on their
cognitive function, emphasising the potential importance of dietary
management decisions in this population. In biological terms our
findings now provide "experimental" evidence in humans to support
the long debated hypothesis that nutrition during critical or
vulnerable periods of brain growth may have lasting consequences for
cognition.
5 10
Apart from its broader biological purpose, this study examined the practical question of whether early diet influences outcome in a typical, unselected, and heterogeneous preterm population in a neonatal unit. We did not study whether the perinatal sensitivity to nutrition identified extended beyond full term. While many other investigators have approached this1-6 there is still a paucity of formal randomised studies.8 The only strictly randomised study of post-term nutrition on long term outcome is that by Grantham-McGregor et al on 127 subjects. They showed a small increase in cognitive function at follow up in nutritionally supplemented stunted children in a developing country.20
Our data also show (tables 2 and 3) the higher IQ in children whose early diet included their own mother's milk (trial B) versus those fed solely on formula (trial A). This non-randomised comparison has been published elsewhere19 and does not confound the present study, which considers the randomised comparison of standard infant formula versus nutrient enriched preterm formula used either as sole diets (trial A), as supplements to mother's milk (trial B), or in the balanced addition of trials A and B which preserves randomisation.
|
Sex differences in the effect of diet
Previously and in another cohort (comparing preterm formula with
banked donor breast milk) we found that effects on development induced
by early diet were most prominent for language development.21 Again at 7 1/2 - 8 years verbal or
language based skills were predominantly affected. Lack of dietary
effect on performance skills, however, might reflect our choice of only two performance subscales (block design and object assembly) in this
abbreviated form of the Weschler intelligence scale for children (revised). This issue will be resolved at future planned follow up.
Diet and cerebral palsy
Unexpectedly, among infants fed the standard rather than preterm
formula cerebral palsy was significantly more common, and we explored
whether the lower cognitive scores seen in those fed standard formula
were due to this imbalance. This proved not to be the case; even with
specific analysis of data from children with cerebral palsy, low verbal
scores (<85; over 1 SD below the mean) were seen over twice as
commonly in both boys and girls previously fed the term rather than
preterm formula and over three times as commonly in boys (45%
v 13%).
Clinical implications
The two trial formulas (table 1) differed in their contents of
protein, energy, calcium, phosphorus, iron, zinc, copper, and several
other micronutrients, though not in quality of protein or fat. Our
trial was not designed to explore which nutrients influenced
neurodevelopment. Broadly our findings support the generic hypothesis
that failure to meet overall nutrient needs during this critical period
of brain growth has significant consequences for cognitive development.
While standard "term" formulas, widely used when our cohort was
recruited, are now infrequently fed to very low birthweight preterm
infants, poor nutritional status remains common in these babies; our
findings therefore have contemporary relevance in emphasising the
importance of avoiding this.
| |
Acknowledgments |
|---|
We thank the Medical Research Council for its core support; the staff of the neonatal units in Norwich and Sheffield; Drs C E S Leeson-Payne and G Lister for their major contribution in developmental testing of the subjects; Drs P M Crowle and RJ Pearse for their collaboration; Evelyn Smith for preparing the manuscript; and, in particular, the children taking part in the study, their families, and the schools which provided accommodation.
Contributors: AL initiated and conceived the original study hypothesis and design and participated in analysing the results and writing the paper. RM participated in the core study design, selected the neurodevelopmental outcome tools used, performed the developmental tests, and supervised and trained two other field workers in their use; RM also participated in analysing and checking data and writing the paper. TC gave statistical advice throughout the study, made key contributions to data interpretation and presentation, and discussed the paper with the other authors during its production. AL is the guarantor of the study.
Funding: Contribution from Farley Health Products (a division of H J Heinz). The preterm formula was designed by us for this study and manufactured and supplied by Farleys.
Competing interests: None declared.
| |
References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
critical analysis.
In:
Oliverio A,
ed.
Genetics, environment and intelligence.
Amsterdam: Elsevier, 1977:215-235.(Accepted 27 August 1998)
Read all Rapid Responses