←  Journal Club

JOURNAL CLUB · ARTICLE OF THE WEEK

Routine probiotics and NEC in preterm infants

Imren C, Jongejans V, Onland W, et al. JAMA Netw Open. 2026;9(8):e2631601. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2026.31601. A multicentre retrospective before-after cohort study.

PROBIOTICS
HALVED NEC
12% TO 5%
STUDY AT A GLANCE
Clinical question
In very and extremely preterm infants, is routinely implementing a multistrain probiotic associated with less necrotising enterocolitis?
Design
Multicentre retrospective cohort comparing the period before vs after routine probiotic implementation, with interrupted time-series as a sensitivity analysis.
Setting
2 NICUs in the Netherlands. Probiotics introduced Oct 2020 or Mar 2021; cohort born 2018 to 2024.
Population
1413 preterm infants <30 weeks, <1000 g, or both (598 before, 815 after). Median 27.7-27.9 weeks, 950-975 g.
Exposure
A multistrain product (B. infantis Bb-02, B. lactis BB-12, S. thermophilus TH-4) added to enteral feeds. Protocol adherence 96%.
Primary outcome
NEC incidence (medical, surgical or fatal).
Safety
Probiotic-associated sepsis was monitored. Human milk was used throughout, reducing nutritional confounding.
Close to home
Answers the real-world question a unit faces: should we adopt routine probiotics?
KEY RESULTS

NEC roughly halved

NEC fell from 11.9% to 5.3% after implementation (adjusted RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.34-0.70, P<0.001).

Not just a time trend

Interrupted time-series found no evidence that background temporal trends explained the reduction.

Held across severity and gestation

The fall was consistent across medical, surgical and fatal NEC, and among extremely preterm (<28 weeks) infants.

No change in all-cause mortality

All-cause mortality was unchanged (11.7% vs 11.5%; ARR 1.06, 95% CI 0.82-1.39).

A safety signal to watch

Non-NEC mortality rose from 7.2% to 9.6% (ARR 1.42, 95% CI 1.01-1.98), not clearly attributable to probiotics, with 1 case of probiotic-associated sepsis.

WHY THIS MATTERS

  • NEC is a devastating, hard-to-predict emergency of the preterm gut
  • Probiotics are already widely used, but the evidence has been mixed and strain-dependent
  • Regulators (including the US FDA) have warned about probiotic sepsis in preterm infants
  • Units need real-world data on whether to adopt routine probiotics
  • This study pairs a large cohort with a specific, well-characterised product

STRENGTHS

  • Large and multicentre, with a parallel reference cohort
  • Interrupted time-series analysis to guard against secular trends
  • Adjusted for key confounders, with uniform human-milk feeding
  • High protocol adherence (96%) after implementation
  • A substantial number of extremely preterm infants, enabling subgroup analysis

LIMITATIONS

  • Retrospective before-after design, open to secular and unmeasured confounding
  • Exposure was defined by implementation period, not confirmed individual receipt, so it estimates a strategy rather than individual efficacy
  • The higher baseline NEC rate may reflect case mix or diagnostic differences
  • The rise in non-NEC mortality is unexplained and warrants caution
  • A single product and setting; randomised trials are still warranted, especially in the most preterm

Practice implications

NEC is one of the emergencies a special care nursery dreads, so prevention matters. This large Dutch cohort found that routinely implementing a specific multistrain probiotic (B. infantis Bb-02, B. lactis BB-12, S. thermophilus TH-4) roughly halved NEC in very and extremely preterm infants, and the fall held up against background time trends. That is encouraging and consistent with earlier trials of the same formulation. Two cautions temper it: this is a before-after cohort (not a randomised trial), and non-NEC mortality rose for reasons that were not clearly related to probiotics, alongside one case of probiotic-associated sepsis. The practical message is that routine probiotics are a plausible NEC-prevention strategy, but the product, strain and protocol matter and any program needs careful safety monitoring. Probiotic use is a unit-level decision, so follow your own network or state guidance, keep prioritising human milk, and stay alert for probiotic sepsis in the smallest babies.

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS
1

Would you adopt routine probiotics on the strength of a before-after cohort, or wait for a randomised trial?

2

How much does the specific strain and product matter when interpreting probiotic evidence?

3

How should the unexplained rise in non-NEC mortality change your interpretation?

4

What safety monitoring would you want in place before starting a probiotic program?

RELATED & REFERENCES
Necrotising enterocolitis
The Hub condition page
Probiotic sepsis
Why the smallest babies need monitoring
Strain matters
Effects vary by product, strain and protocol
Journal club
Article of the week and archive
RESOURCES
❝

Take-home message: In a large Dutch cohort of very and extremely preterm infants, routinely implementing a specific multistrain probiotic (B. infantis Bb-02, B. lactis BB-12, S. thermophilus TH-4) was associated with NEC roughly halving (12% to 5%), a reduction that held up against background time trends. All-cause mortality was unchanged. Two cautions: it is a before-after cohort, not a randomised trial, and non-NEC mortality rose for unclear reasons, with one probiotic-associated sepsis. Routine probiotics are a plausible NEC-prevention strategy, but product, strain and safety monitoring matter.

For educational purposes only. Journal club appraisal - figures paraphrased from the published trial; read the full article for complete data. Always align practice to your local guidelines.

Enter Password