PubMed · 6728595
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
W C MacLean. 1984. Formula composition.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/6728595/
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Digestive intolerance to food proteins may occur in childhood as a result of a wide range of etiologic and pathophysiologic mechanisms. Cow milk protein intolerance is the most common form of food intolerance in children. Food allergy and food intolerance may be confused because both produce similar symptoms, especially in young children with clinical manifestations of food allergy localized to the gastrointestinal tract. On the other hand, food-sensitive enteropathy may be defined as the clinical food-related syndromes associated with an abnormal small intestinal mucosa. Although several foods have been reported to damage the small intestinal mucosa in infancy (soy, rice, fish, chicken meat, egg), cow milk-sensitive enteropathy is the most common cause. Whatever the mechanisms, digestive intolerance to food proteins with or without enteropathy is primarily a temporary condition of infancy, in contrast to most forms of food allergy. In children with these disorders, symptoms usually resolve by 1 to 3 years of age. The variation in prevalence rates of this disorder in different countries can be explained by different diagnostic criteria. The classic food-sensitive enteropathy syndromes with chronic diarrhea and failure to thrive in infancy have become rarer in some European countries, including Spain. Some risk factors for the development of these conditions appear to be early exposure to cow milk feedings, acute infectious diarrhea, and malnutrition. Breast-feeding appears to be at least partially protective.
The efficacy and safety of malto-dextrin/glycine-based oral rehydration solution (ORS) when compared with the glucose-based oral rehydration solution (WHO) was evaluated in a randomized double-blind clinical trial. Thirty-one subjects and 31 controls were studied. The mean values of the ORS intake, stool output, duration of diarrhoea, urine output, weight gain and serum electrolytes were comparable in both the study and the control groups (p > 0.05). It was found that the malto-dextrin/glycine ORS offered no therapeutic advantage over the standard glucose ORS (WHO). In view of the accidental preponderance of children of significantly lower nutritional status among the control group (p < 0.05), it is likely that the efficacy of malto-dextrin/glycine ORS might actually be less than that of the glucose ORS.