Early enteral tube feeding in optimizing treatment of hyperemesis gravidarum: The Maternal and Offspring outcomes after Treatment of HyperEmesis by Refeeding (MOTHER) randomized controlled trial

Iris J. Grooten, Marjette H. Koot, Joris A.M. Van Der Post, Joke M.J. Bais, Carrie Ris-Stalpers, Christiana Naaktgeboren, Henk A. Bremer, David P. Van Der Ham, Wieteke M. Heidema, Anjoke Huisjes, Gunilla Kleiverda, Simone Kuppens, Judith O.E.H. van Laar, Josje Langenveld, Flip Van Der Made, Mariëlle G. Van Pampus, Dimitri Papatsonis, Marie José Pelinck, Paula J. Pernet, Leonie Van RheenenRobbert J. Rijnders, Hubertina C.J. Scheepers, Tatjana E. Vogelvang, Ben W. Mol, Tessa J. Roseboom, Rebecca C. Painter

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

12 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Hyperemesis gravidarum (HG) leads to dehydration, poor nutritional intake, and weight loss. HG has been associated with adverse pregnancy outcomes such as low birth weight. Information about the potential effectiveness of treatments for HG is limited. Objective: We hypothesized that in women with HG, early enteral tube feeding in addition to standard care improves birth weight. Design: We performed a multicenter, open-label randomized controlled trial [Maternal and Offspring outcomes after Treatment of HyperEmesis by Refeeding (MOTHER)] in 19 hospitals in the Netherlands. A total of 116 women hospitalized for HG between 5 and 20 wk of gestation were randomly allocated to enteral tube feeding for ≥7 d in addition to standard care with intravenous rehydration and antiemetic treatment or to standard care alone. Women were encouraged to continue tube feeding at home. On the basis of our power calculation, a sample size of 120 women was anticipated. Analyses were performed according to the intention-to-treat principle. Results: Between October 2014 and March 2016 we randomly allocated 59 women to enteral tube feeding and 57 women to standard care. The mean ± SD birth weight was 3160 ± 770 g in the enteral tube feeding group compared with 3200 ± 680 g in the standard care group (mean difference: -40 g, 95% CI: -230, 310 g). Secondary outcomes, including maternal weight gain, duration of hospital stay, readmission rate, nausea and vomiting symptoms, decrease in quality of life, psychological distress, prematurity, and small-for-gestationalage, also were comparable. Of the women allocated to enteral tube feeding, 28 (47%) were treated according to protocol. Enteral tube feeding was discontinued within 7 d of placement in the remaining women, primarily because of its adverse effects (34%). Conclusions: In women with HG, early enteral tube feeding does not improve birth weight or secondary outcomes. Many women discontinued tube feeding because of discomfort, suggesting that it is poorly tolerated as an early routine treatment of HG.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)812-820
Number of pages9
JournalAmerican Journal of Clinical Nutrition
Volume106
Issue number3
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Sep 2017

Keywords

  • Enteral nutrition
  • Intravenous rehydration
  • Morning sickness
  • Nausea and vomiting in pregnancy
  • Weight loss pregnancy outcome
  • Fluid Therapy
  • Dehydration/etiology
  • Humans
  • Young Adult
  • Adult
  • Female
  • Weight Gain
  • Hyperemesis Gravidarum/therapy
  • Infant, Newborn
  • Antiemetics/therapeutic use
  • Infant, Low Birth Weight
  • Standard of Care
  • Treatment Outcome
  • Hospitalization
  • Energy Intake
  • Pregnancy
  • Birth Weight
  • Weight Loss
  • Enteral Nutrition/adverse effects
  • Pregnancy Outcome

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Early enteral tube feeding in optimizing treatment of hyperemesis gravidarum: The Maternal and Offspring outcomes after Treatment of HyperEmesis by Refeeding (MOTHER) randomized controlled trial'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this