| Title |
Feasibility and Efficacy of Defatted Human Milk in the Treatment for Chylothorax After Cardiac Surgery in Infants
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Pediatric Cardiology, April 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00246-016-1393-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Kristi L. Fogg, Diane M. DellaValle, Jason R. Buckley, Eric M. Graham, Sinai C. Zyblewski |
| Abstract |
Chylothorax is a well-described complication after cardiothoracic surgery in children. Medical nutritional therapy for chylothorax includes medium-chain triglyceride (MCT) formulas and reduction in enteral long-chain triglyceride intake to reduce chyle production. Human milk is usually eliminated from the diet of infants with chylothorax because of its high long-chain triglyceride content. However, given the immunologic properties of human milk, young infants with chylothorax may benefit from using human milk over human milk substitutes. We performed a retrospective cohort study to describe the feasibility and efficacy of defatted human milk (DHM) for the treatment for chylothorax in infants after cardiac surgery and to compare growth outcomes between infants treated with DHM (n = 14) versus MCT formula (n = 21). There were no differences in mortality or length of hospital stay between the DHM and MCT formula treatment groups. The DHM treatment group had a significantly higher weight-for-age z-score at hospital discharge compared to the MCT formula group with median z-scores of -1 (-2 to 0.5) and -1.5 (-2 to 0), respectively (p = 0.02). In infants with chylothorax after cardiac surgery, DHM is a safe and feasible medical nutritional treatment and may have potential benefits for improved nutrition and growth. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 58 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 57 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 11 | 19% |
| Other | 10 | 17% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 7% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 5% |
| Researcher | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 8 | 14% |
| Unknown | 19 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 22 | 38% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 7 | 12% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 2% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 2% |
| Sports and Recreations | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 25 | 43% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 April 2016.
All research outputs
#18,453,763
of 22,865,319 outputs
Outputs from Pediatric Cardiology
#856
of 1,407 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#219,031
of 299,111 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Pediatric Cardiology
#8
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,865,319 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,407 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.7. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 299,111 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.