Search tips
Search criteria

Results 1-25 (1008917)

Clipboard (0)

Related Articles

1.  Nutritional management in head and neck cancer: United Kingdom National Multidisciplinary Guidelines 
The Journal of Laryngology and Otology  2016;130(Suppl 2):S32-S40.
Nutritional support and intervention is an integral component of head and neck cancer management. Patients can be malnourished at presentation, and the majority of patients undergoing treatment for head and neck cancer will need nutritional support. This paper summarises aspects of nutritional considerations for this patient group and provides recommendations for the practising clinician.
• A specialist dietitian should be part of the multidisciplinary team for treating head and neck cancer patients throughout the continuum of care as frequent dietetic contact has been shown to have enhanced outcomes. (R)
• Patients with head and neck cancer should be nutritionally screened using a validated screening tool at diagnosis and then repeated at intervals through each stage of treatment. (R)
• Patients at high risk should be referred to the dietitian for early intervention. (R)
• Offer treatment for malnutrition and appropriate nutrition support without delay given the adverse impact on clinical, patient reported and financial outcomes. (R)
• Use a validated nutrition assessment tool (e.g. scored Patient Generated–Subjective Global Assessment or Subjective Global Assessment) to assess nutritional status. (R)
• Offer pre-treatment assessment prior to any treatment as intervention aims to improve, maintain or reduce decline in nutritional status of head and neck cancer patients who have malnutrition or are at risk of malnutrition. (G)
• Patients identified as well-nourished at baseline but whose treatment may impact on their future nutritional status should receive dietetic assessment and intervention at any stage of the pathway. (G)
• Aim for energy intakes of at least 30 kcal/kg/day. As energy requirements may be elevated post-operatively, monitor weight and adjust intake as required. (R)
• Aim for energy and protein intakes of at least 30 kcal/kg/day and 1.2 g protein/kg/day in patients receiving radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy. Patients should have their weight and nutritional intake monitored regularly to determine whether their energy requirements are being met. (R)
• Perform nutritional assessment of cancer patients frequently. (G)
• Initiate nutritional intervention early when deficits are detected. (G)
• Integrate measures to modulate cancer cachexia changes into the nutritional management. (G)
• Start nutritional therapy if undernutrition already exists or if it is anticipated that the patient will be unable to eat for more than 7 days. Enteral nutrition should also be started if an inadequate food intake (60 per cent of estimated energy expenditure) is anticipated for more than 10 days. (R)
• Use standard polymeric feed. (G)
• Consider gastrostomy insertion if long-term tube feeding is necessary (greater than four weeks). (R)
• Monitor nutritional parameters regularly throughout the patient's cancer journey. (G)
• Pre-operative:
○ Patients with severe nutritional risk should receive nutrition support for 10–14 days prior to major surgery even if surgery has to be delayed. (R)
○ Consider carbohydrate loading in patients undergoing head and neck surgery. (R)
• Post-operative:
○ Initiate tube feeding within 24 hours of surgery. (R)
○ Consider early oral feeding after primary laryngectomy. (R)
• Chyle Leak:
○ Confirm chyle leak by analysis of drainage fluid for triglycerides and chylomicrons. (R)
○ Commence nutritional intervention with fat free or medium chain triglyceride nutritional supplements either orally or via a feeding tube. (R)
○ Consider parenteral nutrition in severe cases when drainage volume is consistently high. (G)
• Weekly dietetic intervention is offered for all patients undergoing radiotherapy treatment to prevent weight loss, increase intake and reduce treatments interruptions. (R)
• Offer prophylactic tube feeding as part of locally agreed guidelines, where oral nutrition is inadequate. (R)
• Offer nutritional intervention (dietary counselling and/or supplements) for up to three months after treatment. (R)
• Patients who have completed their rehabilitation and are disease free should be offered healthy eating advice as part of a health and wellbeing clinic. (G)
• Quality of life parameters including nutritional and swallowing, should be measured at diagnosis and at regular intervals post-treatment. (G)
PMCID: PMC4873913  PMID: 27841109
2.  Surgery and transplantation – Guidelines on Parenteral Nutrition, Chapter 18 
In surgery, indications for artificial nutrition comprise prevention and treatment of catabolism and malnutrition. Thus in general, food intake should not be interrupted postoperatively and the re-establishing of oral (e.g. after anastomosis of the colon and rectum, kidney transplantation) or enteral food intake (e.g. after an anastomosis in the upper gastrointestinal tract, liver transplantation) is recommended within 24 h post surgery. To avoid increased mortality an indication for an immediate postoperatively artificial nutrition (enteral or parenteral nutrition (PN)) also exists in patients with no signs of malnutrition, but who will not receive oral food intake for more than 7 days perioperatively or whose oral food intake does not meet their needs (e.g. less than 60–80%) for more than 14 days. In cases of absolute contraindication for enteral nutrition, there is an indication for total PN (TPN) such as in chronic intestinal obstruction with a relevant passage obstruction e.g. a peritoneal carcinoma. If energy and nutrient requirements cannot be met by oral and enteral intake alone, a combination of enteral and parenteral nutrition is indicated. Delaying surgery for a systematic nutrition therapy (enteral and parenteral) is only indicated if severe malnutrition is present. Preoperative nutrition therapy should preferably be conducted prior to hospital admission to lower the risk of nosocomial infections. The recommendations of early postoperative re-establishing oral feeding, generally apply also to paediatric patients. Standardised operative procedures should be established in order to guarantee an effective nutrition therapy.
PMCID: PMC2795372  PMID: 20049072
surgery; transplantation; fast track surgery; postoperative nutrition
3.  Intensive medicine – Guidelines on Parenteral Nutrition, Chapter 14 
In intensive care patients parenteral nutrition (PN) should not be carried out when adequate oral or enteral nutrition is possible. Critically ill patients without symptoms of malnutrition, who probably cannot be adequately nourished enterally for a period of <5 days, do not require full PN but should be given at least a basal supply of glucose. Critically ill patients should be nourished parenterally from the beginning of intensive care if they are unlikely to be adequately nourished orally or enterally even after 5–7 days. Critically ill and malnourished patients should, in addition to a possible partial enteral nutrition, be nourished parenterally. Energy supply should not be constant, but should be adapted to the stage, the disease has reached. Hyperalimentation should be avoided at an acute stage of disease in any case. Critically ill patients should be given, as PN, a mixture consisting of amino acids (between 0.8 and 1.5 g/kg/day), carbohydrates (around 60% of the non-protein energy) and fat (around 40% of the non-protein energy) as well as electrolytes and micronutrients.
PMCID: PMC2795375  PMID: 20049075
substrate supply; critically ill; sepsis; intensive care
4.  Nutritional Status and Liver Transplantation 
Chronic liver disease has a profound effect on nutritional status and undernourishment is almost universally present in patients with end-stage liver disease undergoing liver transplantation. In the last decades, due to epidemiological changes, a trend showing an increase in patients with end-stage liver disease and associated obesity has also been reported in developed countries. Nutrition abnormalities may influence the outcome after transplantation therefore, the importance to carefully assess the nutritional status in the work-up of patients candidates for liver transplantation is widely accepted. More attention has been given to malnourished patients as they represent the greater number. The subjective global nutritional assessment and anthropometric measurements are recognized in current guidelines to be adequate in identifying those patients at risk of malnutrition. Cirrhotic patients with a depletion in lean body mass and fat deposits have an increased surgical risk and malnutrition may impact on morbidity, mortality and costs in the post-transplantation setting. For this reason an adequate calorie and protein intake should always be ensured to malnourished cirrhotic patient either through the diet, or using oral nutritional supplements or by enteral or parenteral nutrition although studies supporting the efficacy of nutritional supplementation in improving the clinical outcomes after transplantation are still scarce. When liver function is restored, an amelioration in the nutritional status is expected. After liver transplantation in fact dietary intake rapidly normalizes and fat mass is progressively regained while the recovery of muscle mass can be slower. In some patients unregulated weight gain may lead to over-nutrition and may favor metabolic disorders (hypertension, hyperglycemia, hyperlipidemia). This condition, defined as ‘metabolic syndrome’, may play a negative role on the overall survival of liver transplant patients. In this report we review data on nutrition and liver transplantation.
PMCID: PMC3940406  PMID: 25755385
Body weight; cirrhosis; end stage liver disease; malnutrition; nutritional assessment; nutritional support or nutritional therapy; obesity; outcomes; BCAA, branched chain amino acids; BMI, body mass index; LT, liver transplantation; MELD, model for end-stage liver disease; SGA, subjective global assessment for nutrition
5.  A clinical audit of the nutritional status and need for nutrition support amongst head and neck cancer patients treated with radiotherapy 
Radiotherapy is an effective treatment for head and neck cancers but patients often experience side effects which lead to weight loss. Nutrition intervention in the form of counselling or oral nutrition support (ONS) is frequently needed for these patients. For some patients, tube feeding is required to minimise weight loss during treatment.
Data was collected on 48 patients who received radiotherapy to the head and neck region over a nine-month period (June 2009–March 2010). Retrospective data collection was commenced in July 2010. Each patient's Diet Therapy Department record was reviewed. Main outcome measures were: 1) type of nutrition support; 2) percentage weight change during treatment; and 3) Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment Global (PG-SGA) rating.
On initial assessment 28 (77.8%) patients were classified as well nourished using the PG-SGA. Mean weight loss during radiotherapy was 5.74%. Risk factors for the need for ONS and enteral nutrition support (ENS) were older age, presence of nutrition impact symptoms, high-risk tumour sites, advanced disease and chemotherapy. No significant difference was shown in weight loss between ONS and ENS groups.
This study identified the need for early dietetic intervention for high nutritional risk groups of head and neck cancer patients to prevent significant weight loss. Pre-treatment nutritional status did not influence weight loss during treatment. ONS alone cannot prevent significant weight loss in patients with multiple nutrition impact symptoms. Early enteral feeding should be considered in this group of patients.
PMCID: PMC3413925  PMID: 22905049
Enteral nutrition; head and neck neoplasms; nutrition status; nutritional support
6.  Pancreatic cancer surgery and nutrition management: a review of the current literature 
Surgery remains the only curative treatment for pancreaticobiliary tumors. These patients typically present in a malnourished state. Various screening tools have been employed to help with preoperative risk stratification. Examples include the subjective global assessment (SGA), malnutrition universal screening tool (MUST), and nutritional risk index (NRI). Adequate studies have not been performed to determine if perioperative interventions, based on nutrition risk assessment, result in less morbidity and mortality. The routine use of gastric decompression with nasogastric sump tubes may be unnecessary following elective pancreatic resections. Instead, placement should be selective and employed on a case-by-case basis. A wide variety of feeding modalities are available, oral nutrition being the most effective. Artificial nutrition may be provided by temporary nasal tube (nasogastric, nasojejunal, or combined nasogastrojejunal tube) or surgically placed tube [gastrostomy (GT), jejunostomy (JT), gastrojejunostomy tubes (GJT)], and intravenously (parenteral nutrition, PN). The optimal tube for enteral feeding cannot be determined based on current data. Each is associated with a specific set of complications. Dual lumen tubes may be useful in the presence of delayed gastric emptying (DGE) as the stomach may be decompressed while feeds are delivered to the jejunum. However, all feeding tubes placed in the small intestine, except direct jejunostomies, commonly dislodge and retroflex into the stomach. Jejunostomies are associated with less frequent, but more serious complications. These include intestinal torsion and bowel necrosis. PN is associated with septic, metabolic, and access-related complications and should be the feeding strategy of last-resort. Enteral feeds are clearly preferred over parental nutrition. A sound understanding of perioperative nutrition may improve patient outcomes. Patients undergoing pancreatic cancer surgery should undergo multidisciplinary nutrition screening and intervention, and the surgical/oncological team should include nutrition professionals in managing these patients in the perioperative period.
PMCID: PMC4318958  PMID: 25713805
Complications; enteral feeding tubes; nutrition; pancreatic cancer surgery
7.  Enteral nutrition and the critically ill. 
Postgraduate Medical Journal  1996;72(849):395-402.
Critically ill patients invariably require nutritional intervention. Traditionally, enteral nutrition has not been widely employed in this patient population. This is due in part to the success of present-day parenteral nutrition, and to difficulties encountered with enteral feeding. Recent evidence has demonstrated that enteral is preferable to parenteral nutrition in terms of cost, complications, gut mucosal maintenance, and metabolic and immune function. Enterally administered nutritional support can and should be utilised as the preferred route of nourishment for the critically ill. The appropriate choice of access and formula, as well as a rational strategy for implementation, should improve the likelihood of success. This article describes the unique features of critical illness as they pertain to nutritional support, the benefits of enteral nutrition, and the obstacles to success, and offers suggestions which may improve the ability to provide nutrients adequately via the intestinal tract.
PMCID: PMC2398520  PMID: 8935598
8.  Small Bowel Transplant 
The Medical Advisory Secretariat undertook a review of the evidence on the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of small bowel transplant in the treatment of intestinal failure.
Small Bowel Transplantation
Intestinal failure is the loss of absorptive capacity of the small intestine that results in an inability to meet the nutrient and fluid requirements of the body via the enteral route. Patients with intestinal failure usually receive nutrients intravenously, a procedure known as parenteral nutrition. However, long-term parenteral nutrition is associated with complications including liver failure and loss of venous access due to recurrent infections.
Small bowel transplant is the transplantation of a cadaveric intestinal allograft for the purpose of restoring intestinal function in patients with irreversible intestinal failure. The transplant may involve the small intestine alone (isolated small bowel ISB), the small intestine and the liver (SB-L) when there is irreversible liver failure, or multiple organs including the small bowel (multivisceral MV or cluster). Although living related donor transplant is being investigated at a limited number of centres, cadaveric donors have been used in most small bowel transplants.
The actual transplant procedure takes approximately 12-18 hours. After intestinal transplant, the patient is generally placed on prophylactic antibiotic medication and immunosuppressive regimen that, in the majority of cases, would include tacrolimus, corticosteroids and an induction agent. Close monitoring for infection and rejection are essential for early treatment.
Medical Advisory Secretariat Review
The Medical Advisory Secretariat undertook a review of 35 reports from 9 case series and 1 international registry. Sample size of the individual studies ranged from 9 to 155.
As of May 2001, 651 patients had received small bowel transplant procedures worldwide. According to information from the Canadian Organ Replacement Register, a total of 27 small bowel transplants were performed in Canada from 1988 to 2002.
Patient Outcomes
The experience in small bowel transplant is still limited. International data showed that during the last decade, patient survival and graft survival rates from SBT have improved, mainly because of improved immunosuppression therapy and earlier detection and treatment of infection and rejection. The Intestinal Transplant Registry reported 1-year actuarial patient survival rates of 69% for isolated small bowel transplant, 66% for small bowel-liver transplant, and 63% for multivisceral transplant, and a graft survival rate of 55% for ISB and 63% for SB-L and MV. The range of 1-year patient survival rates reported ranged from 33%-87%. Reported 1-year graft survival rates ranged from 46-71%.
Regression analysis performed by the International Transplant Registry in 1997 indicated that centres that have performed at least 10 small bowel transplants had better patient and graft survival rates than centres that performed less than 10 transplants. However, analysis of the data up to May 2001 suggests that the critical mass of 10 transplants no longer holds true for transplants after 1995, and that good results can be achieved at any multiorgan transplant program with moderate patient volumes.
The largest Centre reported an overall 1-year patient and graft survival rate of 72% and 64% respectively, and 5-year patient and graft survival of 48% and 40% respectively. The overall 1-year patient survival rate reported for Ontario pediatric small bowel transplants was 61% with the highest survival rate of 83% for ISB.
The majority (70% or higher) of surviving small bowel transplant recipients was able to wean from parenteral nutrition and meet all caloric needs enterally. Some may need enteral or parenteral supplementation during periods of illness. Growth and weight gain in children after ISB were reported by two studies while two other studies reported a decrease in growth velocity with no catch-up growth.
The quality of life after SBT was reported to be comparable to that of patients on home enteral nutrition. A study found that while the parents of pediatric SBT recipients reported significant limitations in the physical and psychological well being of the children compared with normal school children, the pediatric SBT recipients themselves reported a quality of life similar to other school children.
Survival was found to be better in transplants performed since 1991. Patient survival was associated with the type of organ transplanted with better survival in isolated small bowel recipients.
Adverse Events
Despite improvement in patient and graft survival rates, small bowel transplant is still associated with significant mortality and morbidity.
Infection with subsequent sepsis is the leading cause of death (51.3%). Bacterial, fungal and viral infections have all been reported. The most common viral infections are cytomegalorvirus (18-40%) and Epstein-Barr virus. The latter often led to ß-cell post-transplant lymphoproliferative disease.
Graft rejection is the second leading cause of death after SBT (10.4%) and is responsible for 57% of graft removal. Acute rejection rates ranged from 51% to 83% in the major programs. Most of the acute rejection episodes were mild and responded to steroids and OKT3. Antilymphocyte therapy was needed in up to 27% of patients. Isolated small bowel allograft and positive lymphocytotoxic cross-match were found to be risk factors for acute rejection.
Post-transplant lymphoproliferative disease occurred in 21% of SBT recipients and accounted for 7% of post-transplant mortality. The frequency was higher in pediatric recipients (31%) and in adults receiving composite visceral allografts (25%). The allograft itself is often involved in post-transplant lymphoproliferative disease. The reported incidence of host versus graft disease varied widely among centers (0% - 14%).
Surgical complications were reported to occur in 85% of SB-L transplants and 25% of ISB transplants. Reoperations were required in 45% - 66% of patients in a large series and the most common reason for reoperation was intra-abdominal abscess.
The median cost of intestinal transplant in the US was reported to be approximately $275,000US (approximately CDN$429,000) per case. A US study concluded that based on the US cost of home parenteral nutrition, small bowel transplant could be cost-effective by the second year after the transplant.
There is evidence that small bowel transplant can prolong the life of some patients with irreversible intestinal failure who can no longer continue to be managed by parenteral nutrition therapy. Both patient survival and graft survival rates have improved with time. However, small bowel transplant is still associated with significant mortality and morbidity. The outcomes are inferior to those of total parenteral nutrition. Evidence suggests that this procedure should only be used when total parenteral nutrition is no longer feasible.
PMCID: PMC3387750  PMID: 23074441
9.  Clinical nutrition and drug interactions 
A drug’s plasma level, pharmacological effects or side effects, elimination, physicochemical properties or stability could be changed by interactions of drug-drug or drug-nutrition products in patients who receive enteral or parenteral nutritional support. As a result, patients might experience ineffective outcomes or unexpected effects of therapy (such as drug toxicity, embolism). Stability or incompatibility problems between parenteral nutrition admixtures and drugs might lead to alterations in expected therapeutic responses from drug and/or parenteral nutrition, occlusion in venous catheter or symptoms or mortality due to infusion of composed particles. Compatibilities between parenteral nutrition and drugs are not always guaranteed in clinical practice. Although the list of compatibility or incompatibilities of drugs are published for the use of clinicians in their practices, factors such as composition of parenteral nutrition admixture, drug concentration, contact time in catheter, temperature of the environment and exposure to light could change the status of compatibilities between drugs and nutrition admixtures. There could be substantial clinical changes occurring in the patient’s nutritional status and pharmacological effects of drugs due to interactions between enteral nutrition and drugs. Drug toxicity and ineffective nutritional support might occur as a result of those predictable interactions. Although administration of drugs via feeding tube is a complex and problematic route for drug usage, it is possible to minimise the risk of tube occlusion, decreased effects of drug and drug toxicity by using an appropriate technique. Therefore, it is important to consider pharmacological dosage forms of drugs while administering drugs via a feeding tube. In conclusion, since the pharmacists are well-experienced and more knowledgeable professionals in drugs and drug usage compared to other healthcare providers, it is suggested that provision of information and drug counselling by pharmacists in terms of detection and prevention of problems (such as interactions, stability, incompatibility) related with enteral/parenteral nutrition and drugs are invaluable in clinical practice.
PMCID: PMC4382818  PMID: 25931873
Parenteral nutrition; enteral nutrition; drug interactions; incompatibility
10.  Clinical Guideline: Management of Gastroparesis 
This guideline presents recommendations for the evaluation and management of patients with gastroparesis. Gastroparesis is identified in clinical practice through the recognition of the clinical symptoms and documentation of delayed gastric emptying. Symptoms from gastroparesis include nausea, vomiting, early satiety, postprandial fullness, bloating, and upper abdominal pain. Management of gastroparesis should include assessment and correction of nutritional state, relief of symptoms, improvement of gastric emptying and, in diabetics, glycemic control. Patient nutritional state should be managed by oral dietary modifications. If oral intake is not adequate, then enteral nutrition via jejunostomy tube needs to be considered. Parenteral nutrition is rarely required when hydration and nutritional state cannot be maintained. Medical treatment entails use of prokinetic and antiemetic therapies. Current approved treatment options, including metoclopramide and gastric electrical stimulation (GES, approved on a humanitarian device exemption), do not adequately address clinical need. Antiemetics have not been specifically tested in gastroparesis, but they may relieve nausea and vomiting. Other medications aimed at symptom relief include unapproved medications or off-label indications, and include domperidone, erythromycin (primarily over a short term), and centrally acting antidepressants used as symptom modulators. GES may relieve symptoms, including weekly vomiting frequency, and the need for nutritional supplementation, based on open-label studies. Second-line approaches include venting gastrostomy or feeding jejunostomy; intrapyloric botulinum toxin injection was not effective in randomized controlled trials. Most of these treatments are based on open-label treatment trials and small numbers. Partial gastrectomy and pyloroplasty should be used rarely, only in carefully selected patients. Attention should be given to the development of new effective therapies for symptomatic control.
PMCID: PMC3722580  PMID: 23147521
11.  Enteral nutrition in acute pancreatitis: A review of the current evidence 
World Journal of Gastroenterology : WJG  2014;20(43):16123-16131.
The use of enteral feeding as part of the management of acute pancreatitis dates back almost two decades. This review describes the indications for and limitations of enteral feeding for the treatment of acute pancreatitis using up-to-date evidence-based data. A systematic review was carried out to analyse current data on the use of enteral nutrition in the management of acute pancreatitis. Relevant literature was analysed from the viewpoints of enteral vs parenteral feeding, early vs delayed enteral nutrition, nasogastric vs nasojejunal feeding, and early oral diet and immunonutrition, particularly glutamine and probiotic supplementation. Finally, current applicable guidelines and the effects of these guidelines on clinical practice are discussed. The latest meta-analyses suggest that enteral nutrition significantly reduces the mortality rate of severe acute pancreatitis compared to parenteral feeding. To maintain gut barrier function and prevent early bacterial translocation, enteral feeding should be commenced within the first 24 h of hospital admission. Also, the safety of nasogastric feeding, which eases the administration of enteral nutrients in the clinical setting, is likely equal to nasojejunal feeding. Furthermore, an early low-fat oral diet is potentially beneficial in patients with mild pancreatitis. Despite the initial encouraging results, the current evidence does not support the use of immunoenhanced nutrients or probiotics in patients with acute pancreatitis.
PMCID: PMC4239498  PMID: 25473164
Acute pancreatitis; Enteral nutrition; Immunonutrition; Probiotics
12.  How soon should we start interventional feeding in the ICU? 
Purpose of review
Nutrition in the critically ill patient remains a controversial topic. Most clinicians have viewed nutrition as part of patient care but not as a therapeutic intervention. Recent studies have looked at type and timing of nutrition to determine whether they affect important clinical outcomes.
Recent findings
Large-scale, multicentre randomized trials have found that supplemental parenteral nutrition has a deleterious effect in comparison to enteral nutrition alone. Use of early parenteral nutrition in critically ill patients in whom enteral nutrition was contraindicated did not significantly improve clinical outcomes. Also, low-dose or trophic enteral nutrition has similar benefits with less gastrointestinal complications compared with early full dose caloric feedings. The timing of early nutrition has been defined in most large-scale studies as beginning within 48 h of intubation, though some earlier studies used a 24-h cut-off point with some improved outcomes.
Although not strong, the best available data suggest that critically ill patients should be started on enteral tube feeds within 48 h of intubation whenever possible. The use of parenteral nutrition should be limited within the first 6 days, and not used to augment caloric intake. Finally, similar benefits are seen in patients receiving minimal enteral feeds versus full caloric enteral nutrition.
PMCID: PMC4006101  PMID: 24464030
critical care; enteral nutrition; parenteral nutrition; timing; trophic feedings
13.  Enteral and Parenteral Nutrition in the Perioperative Period: State of the Art 
Nutrients  2013;5(2):608-623.
Nutritional support of surgical and critically ill patients has undergone significant advances since 1936 when Studley demonstrated a direct relationship between pre-operative weight loss and operative mortality. The advent of total parenteral nutrition followed by the extraordinary progress in parenteral and enteral feedings, in addition to the increased knowledge of cellular biology and biochemistry, have allowed clinicians to treat malnutrition and improve surgical patient’s outcomes. We reviewed the literature for the current status of perioperative nutrition comparing parenteral nutrition with enteral nutrition. In a surgical patient with established malnutrition, nutritional support should begin at least 7–10 days prior to surgery. Those patients in whom eating is not anticipated beyond the first five days following surgery should receive the benefits of early enteral or parenteral feeding depending on whether the gut can be used. Compared to parenteral nutrition, enteral nutrition is associated with fewer complications, a decrease in the length of hospital stay, and a favorable cost-benefit analysis. In addition, many patients may benefit from newer enteral formulations such as Immunonutrition as well as disease-specific formulations.
PMCID: PMC3635216  PMID: 23429491
total parenteral nutrition; enteral nutrition; perioperative; immunonutrition
14.  Nutritional Support Process for a Patient with Short Bowel Syndrome in Conjunction with Panperitonitis: A Case Report 
Clinical Nutrition Research  2013;2(2):149-153.
Short Bowel Syndrome (SBS) is a condition that causes malabsorption and nutrient deficiency because a large section of the small intestine is missing or has been surgically removed. SBS may develop congenitally or from gastroenterectomy, which often change the motility, digestive, and/or absorptive functions of the small bowel. The surgical procedure for SBS and the condition itself have high mortality rates and often lead to a range of complications associated with long-term parenteral nutrition (PN). Therefore, careful management and appropriate nutrition intervention are needed to prevent complications and to help maintain the physiologic integrity of the remaining intestinal functions. Initial postoperative care should provide adequate hydration, electrolyte support and total parenteral nutrition (TPN) to prevent fatal dehydration. Simultaneously, enteral nutrition should be gradually introduced, with the final goal of using only enteral nutrition support and/or oral intake and eliminating TPN from the diet. A patient should be considered for discharge when macro and micronutrients can be adequately supplied through enteral nutrition support or oral diet. Currently, there is more research on pediatric patients with SBS than on adult patient population. A 35-year-old man with no notable medical history was hospitalized and underwent a surgery for acute appendicitis at a local hospital. He was re-operated on the 8th day after the initial surgery due to complications and was under observation when he suddenly complained of severe abdominal pain and high fever. He was immediately transferred to a tertiary hospital where the medical team discovered free air in the abdomen. He was subsequently diagnosed with panperitonitis and underwent an emergency reoperation to explore the abdomen. Although the patient was expected to be at a high risk of malnutrition due to short bowel syndrome resulting from multiple surgeries, through intensive care under close cooperation between the medical and nutrition support team, his nutritional status improved significantly through continuous central and peripheral parenteral nutrition, enteral nutrition, and oral intake. The purpose of this paper is to report the process of the patient's recovery.
PMCID: PMC3728465  PMID: 23908982
Short bowel syndrome; Nutritional support; Enteral nutrition; Parenteral nutrition
15.  Nutrition support to patients undergoing gastrointestinal surgery 
Nutrition Journal  2003;2:18.
Nutritional depletion has been demonstrated to be a major determinant of the development of post-operative complications. Gastrointestinal surgery patients are at risk of nutritional depletion from inadequate nutritional intake, surgical stress and the subsequent increase in metabolic rate.
Fears of postoperative ileus and the integrity of the newly constructed anastomosis have led to treatment typically entailing starvation with administration of intravenous fluids until the passage of flatus. However, it has since been shown that prompt postoperative enteral feeding is both effective and well tolerated. Enteral feeding is also associated with specific clinical benefits such as reduced incidence of postoperative infectious complications and an improved wound healing response. Further research is required to determine whether enteral nutrition is also associated with modulation of gut function.
Studies have indicated that significant reductions in morbidity and mortality associated with perioperative Total Parenteral Nutrition (TPN) are limited to severely malnourished patients with gastrointestinal malignancy. Meta-analyses have shown that enteral nutrition is associated with fewer septic complications compared with parenteral feeding, reduced costs and a shorter hospital stay, so should be the preferred option whenever possible.
Evidence to support pre-operative nutrition support is limited, but suggests that if malnourished individuals are adequately fed for at least 7–10 days preoperatively then surgical outcome can be improved.
Ongoing research continues to explore the potential benefits of the action of glutamine on the gut and immune system for gastrointestinal surgery patients. To date it has been demonstrated that glutamine-enriched parenteral nutrition results in reduced length of stay and reduced costs in elective abdominal surgery patients. Further research is required to determine whether the routine supplementation of glutamine is warranted.
A limitation for targeted nutritional support is the lack of a standardised, validated definition of nutritional depletion. This would enable nutrition support to be more readily targeted to those surgical patients most likely to derive significant clinical benefit in terms of improved post-operative outcome.
PMCID: PMC293477  PMID: 14641921
16.  Nutrition Support for the Chronically Wasted or Acutely Catabolic Chronic Kidney Disease Patient 
Seminars in nephrology  2009;29(1):75-84.
Because of the number of factors affecting the nutritional and metabolic status in patients with advanced chronic kidney disease or who are on maintenance dialysis, the prevention and treatment of protein-energy wasting (PEW) of chronic kidney disease should involve a comprehensive combination of maneuvers to diminish protein and energy depletion, in addition to therapies that will avoid further losses. The available evidence suggests that nutritional supplementation, administered orally or parenterally, is effective in the treatment of maintenance dialysis patients with PEW in whom oral dietary intake from regular meals cannot maintain adequate nutritional status. Increased oral nutrient intake during dialysis and at home is the ideal choice for this intervention. In clinical practice, the advantages of intradialytic oral nutritional supplements include proven efficacy and compliance. Therefore, at a minimum, oral nutritional supplementation given intradialytically should be attempted in maintenance dialysis patients with PEW, accompanied by individualized dietary advice for appropriate intake at home. In ones who cannot tolerate oral feeding, other forms of nutritional supplementation including intradialytic parenteral nutritional are a reasonable strategy. Although not proven conclusively, nutritional interventions in the form of supplementation may lead to considerable improvements in mortality, hospitalization, and treatment costs.
PMCID: PMC3788638  PMID: 19121477
Wasting; cachexia; ESRD; malnutrition; IDPN
17.  Post-feeding hyperammonaemia in patients with transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt and liver cirrhosis: role of small intestinal ammonia release and route of nutrient administration 
Gut  2000;46(6):849-855.
BACKGROUND—Hyperammonaemia is a pathogenetic factor for hepatic encephalopathy that may be augmented after a transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS). Experimental data suggest that hyperammonaemia may be caused to a large extent by metabolism of small intestinal enterocytes rather than colonic bacteria.
AIMS—To evaluate if ammonia release and glutamine metabolism by small intestinal mucosa contribute to hyperammonaemia in vivo in patients with liver cirrhosis.
METHODS—Using TIPS to examine mesenteric venous blood, we measured mesenteric venous-arterial concentration differences in ammonia and glutamine in patients with liver cirrhosis before, during, and after enteral (n=8) or parenteral (n=8) isonitrogenous infusion of a glutamine containing amino acid solution.
RESULTS—During enteral nutrient infusion, ammonia release increased rapidly compared with the post-absorptive state (65 (58-73) v 107 (95-119) µmol/l after 15 min; mean (95% confidence interval)) in contrast with parenteral infusion (50 (41-59) v 62 (47-77) µmol/l). This resulted in a higher portal ammonia load (29 (21-36) v 14 (8-21) mmol/l/240 minutes) and a higher degree of systemic hyperammonaemia (14 (11-17) v 9 (6-12) mmol/l/240 minutes) during enteral than parenteral infusion. The mesenteric venous-arterial concentration difference in glutamine changed from net uptake to release at the end of the enteral infusion period (−100 (−58 to −141) v 31 (−47-110) µmol/l) with no change during parenteral nutrition.
CONCLUSIONS—These data suggest that small intestinal metabolism contributes to post-feeding hyperammonaemia in patients with cirrhosis. When artificial nutrition is required, parenteral nutrition may be superior to enteral nutrition in patients with portosystemic shunting because of the lower degree of systemic hyperammonaemia.

Keywords: hepatic encephalopathy; intestinal metabolism; ammonia; glutamine; enteral nutrition; parenteral nutrition
PMCID: PMC1756453  PMID: 10807899
18.  Enteral nutrition after bone marrow transplantation 
Archives of Disease in Childhood  1997;77(2):131-136.
Accepted 16 April 1997

Nutritional insult after bone marrow transplantation (BMT) is complex and its nutritional management challenging. Enteral nutrition is cheaper and easier to provide than parenteral nutrition, but its tolerance and effectiveness in reversing nutritional depletion after BMT is poorly defined. Nutritional status, wellbeing, and nutritional biochemistry were prospectively assessed in 21 children (mean age 7.5 years; 14 boys) who received nasogastric feeding after BMT (mean duration 17 days) and in eight children (mean age 8 years, four boys) who refused enteral nutrition and who received dietetic advice only.
 Enteral nutrition was stopped prematurely in eight patients. Greater changes in weight and mid upper arm circumference were observed in the enteral nutrition group, while positive correlations were found between the duration of feeds and increase in weight and in mid upper arm circumference. Vomiting and diarrhoea had a similar incidence in the two groups, while fever and positive blood cultures occurred more frequently in the dietetic advice group. Diarrhoea occurring during enteral nutrition was not associated with fat malabsorption, while carbohydrate malabsorption was associated with rotavirus infection only. Enteral feeding did not, however, affect bone marrow recovery, hospital stay, general wellbeing, or serum albumin concentrations. Hypomagnesaemia, hypophosphataemia, zinc and selenium deficiency were common in both groups. In conclusion, enteral nutrition, when tolerated, is effective in limiting nutritional insult after BMT. With existing regimens nutritional biochemistry should be closely monitored in order to provide supplements when required.

PMCID: PMC1717280  PMID: 9301351
19.  Influence of early post-burn enteral nutrition on clinical outcomes of patients with extensive burns 
Sepsis commonly occurs in severe post-burn patients, often resulting in death. We aimed to evaluate the influence of early enteral feeding on outcomes in patients with extensive burns, including infection incidence, healing and mortality. We retrospectively reviewed 60 patients with extensive burns, 35 who had received early enteral nutrition and 25 who had received parenteral nutrition. Average healing time, infection incidence and mortality were clinically observed. Hemoglobin and serum albumin were monitored weekly in both groups during treatment. Causative organisms were identified in patients with sepsis. Infection incidence was significantly less in the enteral nutrition group than the parenteral nutrition group (17.1% vs 44.0%; p = 0.023); and latency duration was longer in the enteral nutrition group than in the parenteral nutrition group (30.5 ± 4.7 days vs 14.5 ± 2.3 days; p<0.001). Duration of antibiotic therapy of the enteral nutrition group was significantly shorter than that of the parenteral nutrition group (12.5 ± 3.0 days vs 19.8 ± 3.6 days; p<0.001). Mean hemoglobin results (10.1 ± 1.3 g/L vs 8.3 ± 1.5 g/L; p<0.001) and serum albumin results (44.7 ± 5.7 g/L vs 36.2 ± 6.9 g/L; p<0.001) of enteral nutrition and parenteral nutrition groups, respectively, provided an overview of systemic nutrition and protein metabolism, suggesting higher systemic nutrition and protein synthesis in enteral nutrition group than in parenteral nutrition group. Risk of post-burn infection is reduced in burn patients who are supported by earliest possible enteral nutrition.
PMCID: PMC3082077  PMID: 21562642
enteral nutrition; enterogenic infection; extensive burns; hypermetabolism
20.  Enteral Nutrition and Acute Pancreatitis: A Review 
Introduction. In patients with acute pancreatitis (AP), nutritional support is required if normal food cannot be tolerated within several days. Enteral nutrition is preferred over parenteral nutrition. We reviewed the literature about enteral nutrition in AP. Methods. A MEDLINE search of the English language literature between 1999–2009. Results. Nasogastric tube feeding appears to be safe and well tolerated in the majority of patients with severe AP, rendering the concept of pancreatic rest less probable. Enteral nutrition has a beneficial influence on the outcome of AP and should probably be initiated as early as possible (within 48 hours). Supplementation of enteral formulas with glutamine or prebiotics and probiotics cannot routinely be recommended. Conclusions. Nutrition therapy in patients with AP emerged from supportive adjunctive therapy to a proactive primary intervention. Large multicentre studies are needed to confirm the safety and effectiveness of nasogastric feeding and to investigate the role of early nutrition support.
PMCID: PMC2929521  PMID: 20811543
21.  Impact of early versus late enteral nutrition on cell mediated immunity and its relationship with glucagon like peptide-1 in intensive care unit patients: a prospective study 
Critical Care  2013;17(3):R123.
Glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) originates from the gastrointestinal system in response to the presence of nutrition in the intestinal lumen and potentiates postprandial insulin secretion. Also, it acts as an immune-modulator which has influences on cell-mediated immunity.
The aim of this study was to determine the impact of early enteral nutrition versus late enteral nutrition on plasma GLP-1 levels and the relationship between GLP-1 changes and cell-mediated immunity.
Materials and methods
The study was designed as a prospective, single-blinded study and carried out in the neurology intensive care unit (ICU) of a university hospital. Twenty-four naive patients with acute thromboembolic cerebrovascular events, with National Institute of Health (NIH) stroke scores between 12 and 16, were included. Any condition interfering with GLP-1 and immunity was regarded as exclusion criterion. Two patients died, and two dropped out of the study due to complicating conditions.
Patients were randomly subjected to early enteral feeding within the first 24 hours (Group 1), or late enteral feeding, beginning 48 hours after admission (Group 2) via a nasogastric tube. Calculated daily energy requirement was supplemented with parenteral nutrition, starting on the first study day for both groups. Blood samples were obtained before, and at 5, 15, 30, 60 and 120 minutes after the first enteral feeding for GLP-1 assays; this procedure was repeated on the third day. Before and 24 hours after the first enteral feeding, samples were also taken for immunological analysis. Clinical observations were recorded.
Pre- and post-feeding plasma GLP-1 changes between the two groups and within groups were evaluated. Lymphocyte subgroup changes before and 24 hours after the first enteral feeding in relation to GLP-1 changes were sought as well.
Group 1 and Group 2 exhibited similar GLP-1 levels in the pre-feeding and post-feeding periods for both the first time and the third day of enteral feeding. Also, no significant change in pre-/post-feeding GLP-1 levels was observed within groups. T-helper and T-regulatory cells increased, T-cytotoxic cells decreased significantly in Group 1 (P = 0.02; P = 0.036; P = 0.0019), but remained the same in Group 2 after enteral feeding. Positive but statistically insignificant clinical effects in terms of predisposition to infections (10% vs 40%) and median time of ICU stay (10 vs 15 days) were observed in Group 1.
Depending on our findings, we propose that early enteral feeding may cause amelioration in cell-mediated immunity via factors other than GLP-1 in ICU patients with acute thromboembolic stroke. However, the possible deleterious effects of parenteral nutrition cannot be ruled out.
PMCID: PMC4057314  PMID: 23786864
22.  Nutrition in chronic pancreatitis 
The pancreas is a major player in nutrient digestion. In chronic pancreatitis both exocrine and endocrine insufficiency may develop leading to malnutrition over time. Maldigestion is often a late complication of chronic pancreatic and depends on the severity of the underlying disease. The severity of malnutrition is correlated with two major factors: (1) malabsorption and depletion of nutrients (e.g., alcoholism and pain) causes impaired nutritional status; and (2) increased metabolic activity due to the severity of the disease. Nutritional deficiencies negatively affect outcome if they are not treated. Nutritional assessment and the clinical severity of the disease are important for planning any nutritional intervention. Good nutritional practice includes screening to identify patients at risk, followed by a thoroughly nutritional assessment and nutrition plan for risk patients. Treatment should be multidisciplinary and the mainstay of treatment is abstinence from alcohol, pain treatment, dietary modifications and pancreatic enzyme supplementation. To achieve energy-end protein requirements, oral supplementation might be beneficial. Enteral nutrition may be used when patients do not have sufficient calorie intake as in pylero-duodenal-stenosis, inflammation or prior to surgery and can be necessary if weight loss continues. Parenteral nutrition is very seldom used in patients with chronic pancreatitis and should only be used in case of GI-tract obstruction or as a supplement to enteral nutrition.
PMCID: PMC3831208  PMID: 24259957
Chronic pancreatitis; Malnutrition; Nutritional risk; Malabsorption; Nutritional risk screening; Metabolism; Nutritional assessment; Nutrition therapy
23.  New perspective for nutritional support of cancer patients: Enteral/parenteral nutrition 
Cancer and its treatment result in severe biochemical and physiological alterations associated with a deterioration of quality of life (QoL). Cancer-related malnutrition may evolve into cancer cachexia due to complex interactions between pro-inflammatory cytokines and the host metabolism. Depending on the type of cancer treatment (either curative or palliative), the clinical condition of the patient and nutritional status, adequate and patient-tailored nutritional intervention should be prescribed (diet counseling, oral supplementation, enteral or total parenteral nutrition). Nutritional support has been widely advocated as adjunctive therapy for a variety of underlying illnesses, including surgery and medical oncotherapy (radiation or chemotherapy for cancer). Glutamine, n-3 fatty acids and probiotics/prebiotics are therapeutic factors that potentially modulate gastrointestinal toxicity related to cancer treatments. Enteral and parenteral nutrition may help improve patient survival, functional status and QoL, yet the benefits appear to be primarily limited to patients with good functional status and with gastrointestinal disease affecting nutritional intake. Parenteral nutrition offers the possibility of increased or maintenance of the nutrient intake in patients for whom normal food intake is inadequate and for whom enteral nutrition is not feasible, is contraindicated or is not accepted by the patient. This article reviews evidence on issues relevant to enteral and parenteral nutrition in patients with cancer.
PMCID: PMC3440777  PMID: 22977559
cancer; cachexia; enteral/parenteral nutrition; n-3 fatty acids; glutamine; prebiotic-probiotic oligosaccharides
24.  Interest of preoperative immunonutrition in liver resection for cancer: study protocol of the PROPILS trial, a multicenter randomized controlled phase IV trial 
BMC Cancer  2014;14:980.
Malnutrition is an independent risk factor of postoperative morbidity and mortality and it’s observed in 20 to 50% of surgical patients. Preoperative interventions to optimize the nutritional status, reduce postoperative complications and enteral nutrition has proven to be superior to the parenteral one. Moreover, regardless of the nutritional status of the patient, surgery impairs the immunological response, thus increasing the risk of postoperative sepsis. Immunonutrition has been developed to improve the immunometabolic host response in perioperative period and it has been proven to reduce significantly postoperative infectious complications and length of hospital stay in patients undergoing elective gastrointestinal surgery for tumors. We hypothesize that a preoperative oral immunonutrition (ORAL IMPACT®) can reduce postoperative morbidity in liver resection for cancer.
Prospective multicenter randomized placebo-controlled double-blind phase IV trial with two parallel treatment groups receiving either study product (ORAL IMPACT®) or control supplement (isocaloric isonitrogenous supplement - IMPACT CONTROL®) for 7 days before liver resection for cancer. A total of 400 patients will be enrolled. Patients will be stratified according to the type of hepatectomy, the presence of chronic liver disease and the investigator center. The main end-point is to evaluate in intention-to-treat analysis the overall 30-day morbidity. Secondary end-points are to assess the 30-day infectious and non-infectious morbidity, length of antibiotic treatment and hospital stay, modifications on total food intake, compliance to treatment, side-effects of immunonutrition, impact on liver regeneration and sarcopenia, and to perform a medico-economic analysis.
The overall morbidity rate after liver resection is 22% to 42%. Infectious post-operative complications (12% to 23%) increase the length of hospital stay and costs and are responsible for a quarter of 30-day mortality. Various methods have been advocated to decrease the rate of postoperative complications but there is no evidence to support or refute the use of any treatment and further trials are required. The effects of preoperative oral immunonutrition in non-cirrhotic patients undergoing liver resection for cancer are unknown. The present trial is designed to evaluate whether the administration of a short-term preoperative oral immunonutrition can reduce postoperative morbidity in non-cirrhotic patients undergoing liver resection for cancer.
Trial registration NCT02041871.
PMCID: PMC4302113  PMID: 25523036
Liver resection; Hepatectomy; Immunonutrition; Liver metastases; HCC; Cholangiocarcinoma
Preterm deaths are responsible for the highest number of neonatal mortality in Nigeria. Preterm nutrition contributes significantly to overall outcome particularly as it relates to neurodevelopment. Recently, new guidelines for enteral feedings in premature infants were issued by the American Academy of Paediatrics and European Society of Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition Committee on Nutrition. Nevertheless, in clinical practice it is often difficult to attain suggested intakes at all times. The situation is worse in Nigeria where there are no specific national guidelines and recommendations derived from local data targeting Preterms. There is a high possibility of significant potential cumulative nutritional deficits occurring in Nigerian preterms. The inevitable suboptimal intake contributes significantly to the incidence of neonatal diseases and outcome. This review describes practical ways of optimizing nutritional intake in these vulnerable neonates with reference to Nigerian situation. Understanding the preterm gut, initiation of parenteral nutrition, need for minimal enteral feeds, ensuring adequate macro and micronutrients intake and need for follow up are discussed. There are limitations to the practice of the recommended preterm nutrition in Nigerian settings, nevertheless the interventions like early commencement of minimal enteral feeds and preference for human breast milk should be practiced optimally. Hence, all health professionals should acknowledge that preterm nutrition may be an emergency and need to improve their knowledge on when and how to achieve optimal feeds in them. There is a dare need through both clinical practice as well as research, to reduce nutritional deficits in these vulnerable infants.
PMCID: PMC4111039  PMID: 25161480

Results 1-25 (1008917)