Evidence indicates that human milk (HM) is the best form of nutrition uniquely suited not only to term but also to preterm infants conferring health benefits in both the short and long-term. However, HM does not provide sufficient nutrition for the very low birth weight (VLBW) infant when fed at the usual feeding volumes leading to slow growth with the risk of neurocognitive impairment and other poor health outcomes such as retinopathy and bronchopulmonary dysplasia. HM should be supplemented (fortified) with the nutrients in short supply, particularly with protein, calcium, and phosphate to meet the high requirements of this group of babies. In this paper the European Milk Bank Association (EMBA) Working Group on HM Fortification discusses the existing evidence in this field, gives an overview of different fortification approaches and definitions, outlines the gaps in knowledge and gives recommendations for practice and suggestions for future research. EMBA recognizes that “Standard Fortification,” which is currently the most utilized regimen in neonatal intensive care units, still falls short in supplying sufficient protein for some VLBW infants. EMBA encourages the use of “Individualized Fortification” to optimize nutrient intake. “Adjustable Fortification” and “Targeted Fortification” are 2 methods of individualized fortification. The quality and source of human milk fortifiers constitute another important topic. There is work looking at human milk derived fortifiers, but it is still too early to draw precise conclusions about their use. The pros and cons are discussed in this Commentary in addition to the evidence around use of fortifiers post discharge.

Objectives: To develop recommendations from the European Milk Bank Association (EMBA) for the establishment and operation of human milk banks (HMB) in Europe. Method: A working group comprising members of the EMBA was convened in 2015 to develop Europe-wide recommendations for milk banks. Each member had experience of guideline development and/or milk banking operations. An initial survey was agreed using collated published global recommendations. A total of 108 potential recommendations were included in the survey; responders noted which were included in their national guidelines. The responses were collated, compared, and discussed and the group determined where there was consensus and where substantial or minor differences were identified. Where there was consensus or robust published evidence on which to base recommendations these were included. When there was no consensus and no clear evidence base, a statement of explanation based on collective expert opinion was agreed. Results: Published, internationally available guidelines with recommendations for human milk banks from France, Italy, and the UK, together with guidelines from Austria, Denmark, Germany, Norway, Slovakia, Spain, Sweden, and Switzerland were included as source materials. These covered: General recommendations; Donor recruitment and screening; Expression, handling, and storage of donor human milk (DHM); Pooling of DHM; Milk screening; Milk treatment (pasteurization); Delivery of DHM to recipients. Conclusions: Evidence based recommendations and consensus statements from the EMBA will now be published on the EMBA website to assist in the safe establishment and operation of HMBs throughout Europe. These have also been used to inform the chapter on human milk to be included in the 2019 edition of the Guide to the quality and safety of tissues and cells for human application, published by the European Directorate for the Quality of Medicines & HealthCare (EDQM).

Background: A mother's own milk (MOM) is the gold standard for the feeding and nutrition of preterm and full term infants. When MOM is not available or there is not enough, donor human milk (DHM) should be used. Milk delivered to Human Milk Banks (HMBs) should be pasteurized to inactivate viral and bacterial agents. Currently, a pasteurization process at 62.5°C for 30 min (Holder pasteurization, HoP) is recommended in all international HMBs guidelines. State of the art: It is known that HoP affects some of the nutritional and biological components of human milk. Studies have demonstrated that temperature cycle in HoP is not always controlled or calibrated. A better check of these parameters in the pasteurizers on the market today may contribute to an improvement of the quality of HM, still maintaining some of the negative effects of the heat treatment of human milk. So, food industry, and dairy industry in particular, are evaluating innovative methodologies alternative to HoP to better preserve the nutritional and biological properties of fresh human milk, while assuring at least the same microbiological safety of HoP. The most studied processing techniques include High-Temperature-Short-Time (HTST) pasteurization, High Pressure Processing (HPP), and Ultraviolet-C (UV-C) irradiation. HTST is a thermal process in which milk is forced between plates or pipes that are heated on the outside by hot water at a temperature of 72°C for 5–15 s. HPP is a non-thermal processing method that can be applied to solid and liquid foods. This technology inactivates pathogenic microorganisms by applying a high hydrostatic pressure (usually 300–800 MPa) during short-term treatments (<5–10 min). UV irradiation utilizes short-wavelength ultraviolet radiation in the UV-C region (200–280 nm), which is harmful to microorganisms. It is effective in destroying the nucleic acids in these organisms, so that their DNA is disrupted by UV radiation. Aim: The aim of this paper is to present the EMBA recommendations on processing of HM, based on the most recent results obtained with these new technologies. Conclusions: Although research on the most promising technologies that will represent an alternative to HoP (HTST, HPP, UV-C) in the future is progressing, it is now important to recognize that the consistency and quality assurance of the pasteurizers on the market today represent a fundamental component that was previously lacking in the Holder approach.