Page 62 - Read Online

Page 6 of 18 Chen et al. Microbiome Res Rep 2025;4:8 https://dx.doi.org/10.20517/mrr.2024.44

Table 1. Characteristics of studies included in this review

Author, year, Number of infants * Baseline Baseline Subgroup and
country [ref] Design Primary aim Study population (MOM/DHM) characteristics MOM characteristics DHM definition of
feeding groups
group
group
Subgroup A
Arboleya et al., Mono-center cohort study Effect of DHM on GA < 34 weeks 42 (in total) GA: 30.9 (2.44) GA: 30.3 (2.7) A
2020, Spain [31] Bifidobacteria BW: 1,351 (353) BW: 1,246 (302) MOM: 100%
MoD: 42% vaginal
DHM: 100%
MoD: 46% vaginal
Ford et al., 2019, Mono-center cohort study Effect of human milk on BW < 1,500 grams 90 (58/32) GA: 28.7 (2.0) GA: 28.4 (2.5) A
[33]
USA microbiota development BW: 1,107 (242) BW: 1,066 (294) MOM: > 50%
MoD: 18% vaginal
MoD: 12% vaginal
DHM: > 50%
Kumbhare et al., Stratified cohorts from a mono- Gut microbiome, oxidative GA 26-30 weeks 30 (20/10) GA: 31.1 (1.8) GA: 27.9 (1.0) GA: 28.4 (0.86) A
2022, Canada [34] center randomized controlled stress and inflammation in milk BW: 1,013 (159) BW: 1,053 (159) MOM: > 50%
open-label trial fortifiers MoD: 20% vaginal MoD: 20% vaginal DHM: > 50%
Piñeiro-Ramos Mono-center cohort study Composition of microbiota and GA < 32 weeks 36 (18/18) GA: 28 (27-29) GA: 29 (28-30) A
et al., 2020, urinary metabolites and/or BW < 1,500 BW: 1,300 (300) BW: 1,400 (200) MOM: 80%
[32]
Spain grams MoD: 45% vaginal MoD: 45% vaginal DHM: 80%
Subgroup B
Cong et al., 2017, Bi-center cohort study Effect of feeding type on gut GA 28 to 32 + 6 18 (15/3) B
USA [36] microbial patterns weeks BW: 1,444.2 (442.7) MOM: > 70%
**
MoD: 40% vaginal DHM: > 70%

Gregory et al., Mono-center cohort study The influence of nutrition on GA < 32 weeks 20 (10/10) GA: 28.4 (1.5) GA: 28.4 (2.1) B
[19]
2016, USA the microbiome BW: 1,044 (258) BW: 1,070 (422) MOM: > 50%
MoD: 10% vaginal MoD: 10% vaginal DHM: > 50%
Morais et al., Mono-center cohort study Impact of different feeding GA < 32 weeks 95 (75/20) GA: 28.3 (2.1) GA: 28.6 (1.8) B
2021, Portugal [37] types on fecal microbiota and BW: 1,123 (345) BW: 1,173 (284) MOM: > 50%
ALP activity MoD: 45% vaginal MoD: 35% vaginal DHM: > 50%
Parra-Llorca et al., Mono-center cohort study Effect of nutrition on gut GA < 32 weeks 62 (34/28) GA: 28.9 (1.9) GA: 29.8 (2.4) B
2018, Spain [35] microbiota composition and/or BW < 1,500 BW: 1,228 (301) BW: 1,304 (262) MOM: > 80%
grams MoD: 59% vaginal MoD: 40% vaginal DHM: > 80%
* **
In groups of interest; for all included infants, not stated separately for DHM or MOM group. MOM: Mother’s own milk; DHM: donor human milk; GA: gestational age (in weeks), expressed as mean (SD) or median
(IQR); BW: birthweight (in gram), expressed as mean (SD) or median (IQR); MoD: mode of delivery, expressed as percentages; ALP: alkaline phosphates.
The applied gut microbiota analysis techniques in each study are listed in Supplementary Table 1. Next-generation sequencing was employed in all eight
studies to measure specific 16S rRNA gene regions. In the study by Arboleya et al., the profiling is specific to the species composition of the genus
[31]
Bifidobacterium only, whereas others studied overall gut microbiota composition .