IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0028010.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Tolerance and Safety Evaluation in a Large Cohort of Healthy Infants Fed an Innovative Prebiotic Formula: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Author

Listed:
  • Pasqua Piemontese
  • Maria L Giannì
  • Christian P Braegger
  • Gaetano Chirico
  • Christoph Grüber
  • Josef Riedler
  • Sertac Arslanoglu
  • Margriet van Stuijvenberg
  • Günther Boehm
  • Jürgen Jelinek
  • Paola Roggero
  • for the MIPS 1 Working Group Berlin, Frankfurt (Oder), and Friedrichsdorf, Germany, Groningen, The Netherlands, Milan and Brescia, Italy, Zurich, Switzerland, and Schwarzach, Austria

Abstract

Background: the addition of oligosaccharides to infant formula has been shown to mimic some of the beneficial effects of human milk. The aim of the study was to assess the tolerance and safety of a formula containing an innovative mixture of oligosaccharides in early infancy. Methodology/Principal Findings: this study was performed as a multi-center, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial including healthy term infants. Infants were recruited before the age of 8 weeks, either having started with formula feeding or being fully breast-fed (breastfeeding group). Formula-fed infants were randomized to feeding with a regular formula containing a mixture of neutral oligosaccharides and pectin-derived acidic oligosaccharides (prebiotic formula group) or regular formula without oligosaccharides (control formula group). Growth, tolerance and adverse events were assessed at 8, 16, 24 and 52 weeks of age. The prebiotic and control groups showed similar mean weight, length and head circumference, skin fold thicknesses, arm circumference gains and stool frequency at each study point. As far as the anthropometric parameters are concerned, the prebiotic group and the control group did not attain the values shown by the breastfeeding group at any study point. The skin fold thicknesses assessed in the breastfeeding group at 8 weeks were strikingly larger than those in formula fed infants, whereas at 52 weeks were strikingly smaller. The stool consistency in the prebiotic group was softer than in the control group at 8, 16 and 24 weeks (p

Suggested Citation

  • Pasqua Piemontese & Maria L Giannì & Christian P Braegger & Gaetano Chirico & Christoph Grüber & Josef Riedler & Sertac Arslanoglu & Margriet van Stuijvenberg & Günther Boehm & Jürgen Jelinek & Paola , 2011. "Tolerance and Safety Evaluation in a Large Cohort of Healthy Infants Fed an Innovative Prebiotic Formula: A Randomized Controlled Trial," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(11), pages 1-9, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0028010
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0028010
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0028010
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0028010&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0028010?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Sander Brons & Machteld E van Beusichem & Ewald M Bronkhorst & Jos M Draaisma & Stefaan J Bergé & Jan G Schols & Anne Marie Kuijpers-Jagtman, 2014. "Methods to Quantify Soft Tissue–Based Cranial Growth and Treatment Outcomes in Children: A Systematic Review," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(2), pages 1-1, February.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0028010. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.