Standardised versus individualised fortification of expressed breastmilk for preterm outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION: Although the precise nutrient requirements of preterm infants remain uncertain, routine human milk fortification is standard practice despite limited evidence of long-term benefit. Whether current fortification strategies optimally balance benefits, risks, and resource use remains unclear. This review evaluates whether individualised fortification improves preterm infant outcomes. METHODS: Randomised controlled trials comparing individualised with standardised fortification were included, evaluating outcomes including mortality, neurodevelopment, growth, and neonatal morbidities. Four databases and three trial registries were searched. Screening, data extraction and quality assessment were conducted independently by two reviewers using Cochrane Risk of Bias-1 tool. Certainty of evidence was assessed using GRADE. RESULTS: Twelve studies including 575 participants were included. Evidence is very uncertain about the effect of individualised fortification on mortality [181 infants, relative risk (RR) 0.20, 95% confidence interval (CI) (0.02, 1.66), p=0.14, I²=0%] and necrotising enterocolitis [193 infants, RR 0.29 (0.05,1.72), p=0.17, I²=0%], both very low certainty. Effect on neurodevelopment at 18-months remains very uncertain. Individualised fortification likely increases head circumference [224 infants, mean difference (MD) 1.76 (0.76, 2.76) mm/week, p=0.0005, I²=52%], weight gain [454 infants, MD 2.87 (1.36, 4.39) g/kg/day, p<0.0002, I²=79%], length gain [261 infants, MD 3.20 (1.22, 5.18) mm/week, p=0.002, I²=81%] and fat-free mass [106 infants, MD 121.4 (25.6, 217.2) g, p=0.01, I²=0], all with moderate-certainty. It may increase fat mass [106 infants, MD 68.9 (6.1, 131.8) g, p=0.03, I²=63%] with low-certainty. CONCLUSION: Individualised fortification likely increases growth in preterm infants; however, whether this is beneficial to clinical and long-term functional health is uncertain. Further high-quality trials with long-term follow-up are needed.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
Neonatology
Published
2026-07-02
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1159/000553366
Primary Topic
Infant Nutrition and Health
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Standardised versus individualised fortification of expressed breastmilk for preterm outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Luling Lin, Barbara Elizabeth Cormack, Frank H. Bloomfield, Mariam Buksh et al.
Neonatology
Infant Nutrition and Health
article

Standardised versus individualised fortification of expressed breastmilk for preterm outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Luling Lin, Barbara Elizabeth Cormack, Frank H. Bloomfield, Mariam Buksh, Chloe Mary Bell
article en

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Although the precise nutrient requirements of preterm infants remain uncertain, routine human milk fortification is standard practice despite limited evidence of long-term benefit. Whether current fortification strategies optimally balance benefits, risks, and resource use remains unclear. This review evaluates whether individualised fortification improves preterm infant outcomes. METHODS: Randomised controlled trials comparing individualised with standardised fortification were included, evaluating outcomes including mortality, neurodevelopment, growth, and neonatal morbidities. Four databases and three trial registries were searched. Screening, data extraction and quality assessment were conducted independently by two reviewers using Cochrane Risk of Bias-1 tool. Certainty of evidence was assessed using GRADE. RESULTS: Twelve studies including 575 participants were included. Evidence is very uncertain about the effect of individualised fortification on mortality [181 infants, relative risk (RR) 0.20, 95% confidence interval (CI) (0.02, 1.66), p=0.14, I²=0%] and necrotising enterocolitis [193 infants, RR 0.29 (0.05,1.72), p=0.17, I²=0%], both very low certainty. Effect on neurodevelopment at 18-months remains very uncertain. Individualised fortification likely increases head circumference [224 infants, mean difference (MD) 1.76 (0.76, 2.76) mm/week, p=0.0005, I²=52%], weight gain [454 infants, MD 2.87 (1.36, 4.39) g/kg/day, p<0.0002, I²=79%], length gain [261 infants, MD 3.20 (1.22, 5.18) mm/week, p=0.002, I²=81%] and fat-free mass [106 infants, MD 121.4 (25.6, 217.2) g, p=0.01, I²=0], all with moderate-certainty. It may increase fat mass [106 infants, MD 68.9 (6.1, 131.8) g, p=0.03, I²=63%] with low-certainty. CONCLUSION: Individualised fortification likely increases growth in preterm infants; however, whether this is beneficial to clinical and long-term functional health is uncertain. Further high-quality trials with long-term follow-up are needed.

Neonatology
Openalex Percentile: Top 9%
Infant Nutrition and Health
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.