Advertisement

Detection of Milk Ejection Using Bioimpedance Spectroscopy in Lactating Women during Milk Expression Using an Electric Breast Pump

  • Hazel GardnerEmail author
  • Ching Tat Lai
  • Leigh Ward
  • Donna Geddes
Article

Abstract

Milk ejection is essential for effective milk removal during breastfeeding and pumping, and for continued milk synthesis. Many women are unable to accurately sense milk ejection to determine whether their infant is receiving milk or, when pumping, to switch the pump to a more effective expression pattern. To determine if changes in bioimpedance parameters are associated with milk ejection in the lactating breast during pumping. 30 lactating women participated in 2 pumping sessions within 2 weeks of each other. During pumping the breasts were monitored with bioimpedance spectroscopy (on either the pumped or the non- pumped breast), and milk flow rate and volume were measured simultaneously. All mothers completed 24-h milk productions. Linear mixed effects models were used to determine associations between milk flow rate and bioimpedance changes. Changes in bioimpedance parameters were greater at the first milk ejection when measured on the pumped breast (median (IQR): R zero: −7 (−17, −4,) % (n = 30); R infinity: −8 (−20, −2) % (n = 29); membrane capacitance: −24 (−59, −7) % (n = 27). Changes in bioimpedance detected in the non-pumped breast were lower at the first milk ejection, R zero: −3 (−8, −2) % (n = 25); R infinity: −5 (−8, −2) % (n = 23); membrane capacitance: −9 (−17, 15) % (n = 24). Smaller less consistent decreases in the bioimpedance characteristics were detected at the second milk ejection in both breasts. Bioimpedance parameters showed a consistent decrease associated with the first milk ejection when electrodes were placed on the pumped breast. Smaller decreases were observed when the non-pumped breast was monitored for the first and second milk ejection. There was wide variation in the magnitude of changes observed, and hence further development of the methodology is needed to ensure reliability.

Keywords

Lactation Breast Bioimpedance Milk ejection 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This research was funded by an unrestricted research grant from Medela, Ag, Baar Switzerland .

The authors would like to thank the participants, and the Australian Breastfeeding Association (WA Branch) for their support (Approval 2016-1).

Compliance with Ethical Standards

HG, CTL & DG are supported by an unrestricted research grant from Medela AG.

The study was approved by The University of Western Australia Human Research Ethics Committee (RA/4/1/7897).

All participants provided written informed consent.

Conflicts of Interest

Author Ward provides consultancy services to ImpediMed Ltd. ImpediMed had no input into the conception or conduct of the study or the writing of the manuscript.

References

  1. 1.
    Truchet S, Honvo-Houéto E. Physiology of milk secretion. Best Pract Res Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2017;31:367–84.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kent JC, Ramsay DT, Doherty D, Larsson M, Hartmann PE. Response of breasts to different stimulation patterns of an electric breast pump. J Hum Lact. 2003;19(2):179–86.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ramsay DT, Mitoulas LR, Kent JC, Cregan MD, Doherty DA, Larsson M, et al. Milk flow rates can be used to identify and investigate milk ejection in women expressing breast milk using an electric breast pump. Breastfeed Med. 2006;1(1):14–23.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ramsay DT, Kent JC, Owens RA, Hartmann PE. Ultrasound imaging of milk ejection in the breast of lactating women. Pediatrics. 2004;113(2):361–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Luther E, Arballo J, Sala N, Cordero Funes J. Suckling pressure in humans: relationship to oxytocin-reproducing reflex milk ejection. J Appl Physiol. 1974;36(3):350–3.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Prime DK, Geddes DT, Hepworth AR, Trengove NJ, Hartmann PE. Comparison of the patterns of milk ejection during repeated breast expression sessions in women. Breastfeed Med. 2011;6(4):183–90.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kyle UG, Bosaeus I, De Lorenzo AD, Deurenberg P, Elia M, Gómez JM, et al. Bioelectrical impedance analysis—part I: review of principles and methods. Clin Nutr. 2004;23(5):1226–43.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cornish B, Chapman M, Hirst C, Mirolo B, Bunce I, Ward L, et al. Early diagnosis of lymphedema using multiple frequency bioimpedance. Lymphology. 2001;34(1):2–11.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ward LC. Bioelectrical impedance spectrometry for the assessment of lymphoedema: principles and practice. Lymphedema: Springer; 2015. p. 123–32.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bera TK. Bioelectrical impedance methods for noninvasive health monitoring: a review. J Med Eng. 2014;2014:1–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gowry B, Shahriman A, Paulraj M, editors. Electrical bio-impedance as a promising prognostic alternative in detecting breast cancer: a review. Biomedical Engineering (ICoBE), 2015 2nd International Conference on; 2015: IEEE.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Malecka-Massalska T, Chara K, Golebiowski P, Wladysiuk M, Smolen A, Kurylcio A, et al. Altered tissue electrical properties in women with breast cancer–preliminary observations. Ann Agric Environ Med. 2013;20(3).Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Tornuev YV, Koldysheva E, Lapiy G, Molodykh O, Balakhnin S, Bushmanova G, et al. Bioimpedancemetry in the diagnostics of inflammatory process in the mammary gland. Bull Exp Biol Med. 2014;156(3):381–3.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Arthur P, Hartmann P, Smith M. Measurement of the milk intake of breast-fed infants. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr. 1987;6(5):758–63.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Fleet I, Linzell J. Rapid method of estimating fat in very small quantities of milk. J Physiol Lond. 1964;175(1):P15–7.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Prime DK, Geddes DT, Spatz DL, Robert M, Trengove NJ, Hartmann PE. Using milk flow rate to investigate milk ejection in the left and right breasts during simultaneous breast expression in women. Int Breastfeed J. 2009;4(1):10.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Gardner H, Kent JC, Lai CT, Mitoulas LR, Cregan MD, Hartmann PE, et al. Milk ejection patterns: an intra-individual comparison of breastfeeding and pumping. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2015;15(1):156.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Studio Team R, Studio R. Integrated development for R. Boston, MA: R Studio Inc.; 2015.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Pinheiro J, Bates D, DebRoy S, Sarkar D. Linear and nonlinear mixed effects models. R package version. 2007;3:57.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Lenth RV. Least-squares means: the R package lsmeans. J Stat Softw. 2016;69(1):1–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Ward L, Sharpe K, Edgar D, Finlay V, Wood F, editors. Measurement of localized tissue water–clinical application of bioimpedance spectroscopy in wound management. J Phys Conf Ser; 2013: IOP Publishing.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    DeNuccio D, Grosvenor C. Effects of volume and distribution of milk on the oxytocin-induced contraction of the lactating rat mammary gland in vivo. J Endocrinol. 1971;51(3):437–46.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Prime DK, Kent JC, Hepworth AR, Trengove NJ, Hartmann PE. Dynamics of milk removal during simultaneous breast expression in women. Breastfeed Med. 2012;7(2):100–6.  https://doi.org/10.1089/bfm.2011.0013.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Ramsay D, Kent J, Hartmann R, Hartmann P. Anatomy of the lactating human breast redefined with ultrasound imaging. J Anat. 2005;206(6):525–34.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Geddes DT, Aljazaf KM, Kent JC, Prime DK, Spatz DL, Garbin CP, et al. Blood flow characteristics of the human lactating breast. J Hum Lact. 2012;28(2):145–52.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Eriksson M, Lundeberg T, Uvnäs-Moberg K. Studies on cutaneous blood flow in the mammary gland of lactating rats. Acta Physiol Scand. 1996;158(1):1–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Molecular Sciences, Faculty of ScienceUniversity of Western AustraliaPerthAustralia
  2. 2.School of Chemistry and Molecular SciencesUniversity of QueenslandBrisbaneAustralia

Personalised recommendations