1921
Volume 101, Issue 5
  • ISSN: 0002-9637
  • E-ISSN: 1476-1645

Abstract

Abstract.

This study was performed to examine whether prenatal lipid-based nutrient supplementation is an effective means of improving birth outcomes compared with other types of supplementation including iron folic acid (IFA), United Nations multiple micronutrient preparation (UNIMAP), other multiple micronutrients (MMN), and fortified corn–soy blend (CSB). A meta-analysis was performed to determine the relative risks and mean differences in birth outcomes between prenatal lipid-based nutrients versus prenatal IFA, UNIMAP, other MMN, and CSB in randomized controlled trials. Eleven databases, including PubMed (MEDLINE), were searched. Study quality was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing the risk of bias. Fifty-eight overall good-quality studies extracted from 11 eligible articles with 101,553 mother–baby pairs were included. Lipid-based nutrient supplementation significantly reduced the risks of low birthweight, small for gestational age, and stunting ( = 5, 5, and 4, respectively) and significantly increased the means of birthweight, birth length, arm circumference, and weight-for-age -score ( = 5, 5, 4, and 3, respectively). Lipid-based nutrient supplementation did not significantly reduce the risk of preterm birth, stillbirth, abortion, perinatal death, or underweight ( = 5, 5, 5, 3, or 3, respectively) or significantly increase the mean of head circumference or height-for-age -score ( = 4 or 2, respectively). In conclusion, the results supported the efficacy of prenatal lipid-based nutrient supplementation compared with IFA, UNIMAP, other MMN, and CSB for reducing the risk of small birth size.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

The graphs shown below represent data from March 2017
/content/journals/10.4269/ajtmh.19-0287
2019-09-16
2020-09-20
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/14761645/101/5/tpmd190287.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.4269/ajtmh.19-0287&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Woods N, Gilliland J, Seabrook JA, 2017. The influence of the built environment on adverse birth outcomes. J Neonatal Perinatal Med 10: 233248.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Adu-Afarwuah S, Lartey A, Okronipa H, Ashorn P, Zeilani M, Peerson JM, Arimond M, Vosti S, Dewey KG, 2015. Lipid-based nutrient supplement increases the birth size of infants of primiparous women in Ghana. Am J Clin Nutr 101: 835846.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Ashorn P et al., 2015. The impact of lipid-based nutrient supplement provision to pregnant women on newborn size in rural Malawi: a randomized controlled trial. Am J Clin Nutr 101: 387397.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Ashorn P et al., 2015. Supplementation of maternal diets during pregnancy and for 6 months postpartum and infant diets thereafter with small-quantity lipid-based nutrient supplements does not promote child growth by 18 months of age in rural Malawi: a randomized controlled trial. J Nutr 145: 13451353.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Callaghan-Gillespie M et al., 2017. Trial of ready-to-use supplemental food and corn-soy blend in pregnant Malawian women with moderate malnutrition: a randomized controlled clinical trial. Am J Clin Nutr 106: 10621069.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Huybregts L, Roberfroid D, Lanou H, Menten J, Meda N, Van Camp J, Kolsteren P, 2009. Prenatal food supplementation fortified with multiple micronutrients increases birth length: a randomized controlled trial in rural Burkina Faso. Am J Clin Nutr 90: 15931600.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Huybregts L, Roberfroid D, Lanou H, Meda N, Taes Y, Valea I, D’Alessandro U, Kolsteren P, Van Camp J, 2013. Prenatal lipid-based nutrient supplements increase cord leptin concentration in pregnant women from rural Burkina Faso. J Nutr 143: 576583.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Johnson W, Darboe MK, Sosseh F, Nshe P, Prentice AM, Moore SE, 2017. Association of prenatal lipid-based nutritional supplementation with fetal growth in rural Gambia. Matern Child Nutr 13: e12367.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Lanou H, Huybregts L, Roberfroid D, Nikièma L, Kouanda S, Van Camp J, Kolsteren P, 2014. Prenatal nutrient supplementation and postnatal growth in a developing nation: an RCT. Pediatrics 133: e1001e1008.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Mridha MK et al., 2016. Lipid-based nutrient supplements for pregnant women reduce newborn stunting in a cluster-randomized controlled effectiveness trial in Bangladesh. Am J Clin Nutr 103: 236249.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Mridha MK, Matias SL, Paul RR, Hussain S, Sarker M, Hossain M, Peerson JM, Vosti SA, Dewey KG, 2017. Prenatal lipid-based nutrient supplements do not affect pregnancy or childbirth complications or cesarean delivery in Bangladesh: a cluster-randomized controlled effectiveness trial. J Nutr 147: 17761784.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Toe LC, Bouckaert KP, De Beuf K, Roberfroid D, Meda N, Thas O, Van Camp J, Kolsteren PW, Huybregts LF, 2015. Seasonality modifies the effect of a lipid-based nutrient supplement for pregnant rural women on birth length. J Nutr 145: 634639.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Haider BA, Bhutta ZA, 2017. Multiple-micronutrient supplementation for women during pregnancy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 4: CD004905.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Higgins JPT, Green S, 2011. Introduction to sources of bias in clinical trials. Higgins JPT, Green S, eds. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Version 5.1.0. The Cochrane Collaboration. Available at: http://handbook-5-1.cochrane.org/chapter_8/8_4_introduction_to_sources_of_bias_in_clinical_trials.htm. Accessed April 15, 2019.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Egger M, Davey Smith G, Schneider M, Minder C, 1997. Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. BMJ 315: 629634.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Das JK, Hoodbhoy Z, Salam RA, Bhutta AZ, Valenzuela-Rubio NG, Weise Prinzo Z, Bhutta ZA, 2018. Lipid-based nutrient supplements for maternal, birth, and infant developmental outcomes. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 8: CD012610.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Egger M, Smith GD, Altman DG, 2007. Systematic Reviews in Healthcare: Meta-Analysis in Context, 2nd edition. London, United Kingdom: BMJ.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.4269/ajtmh.19-0287
Loading
/content/journals/10.4269/ajtmh.19-0287
Loading

Data & Media loading...

Supplemental material, tables and figure

  • Received : 15 Apr 2019
  • Accepted : 16 Aug 2019
  • Published online : 16 Sep 2019
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error