z-logo
Premium
Indications for Administration of Parenteral Nutrition in Adults
Author(s) -
Braunschweig Carol,
Liang HuiFang,
Sheean Patricia
Publication year - 2004
Publication title -
nutrition in clinical practice
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.725
H-Index - 71
eISSN - 1941-2452
pISSN - 0884-5336
DOI - 10.1177/0115426504019003255
Subject(s) - medicine , parenteral nutrition , malnutrition , meta analysis , esophageal cancer , randomized controlled trial , prospective cohort study , esophagus , population , clinical trial , cancer , surgery , intensive care medicine , pediatrics , environmental health
Background: Who benefits from parenteral nutrition (PN) has been the subject of much debate and 4 recent meta‐analyses. Methods: We reviewed the 4 meta‐analyses that examined the prospective, randomized, clinical trials (PRCT) that compared PN with no nutrition support (standard care) for design, study population, outcomes evaluated, and results. Results: Overall, a total of 113 PRCT were included in the 4 meta‐analyses; however, only 4 studies were included in all of them. Despite the differences in populations studied and outcomes evaluated, some similarities emerged: (1) PN does not affect mortality; (2) PN does not reduce complications in normally nourished patients; (3) in malnourished patients, PN demonstrated a trend for reduced infections and complication rates; and (4) PN reduced postoperative complications in patients having surgery for cancer of the esophagus or stomach. Conclusion: PN does not appear to be beneficial for most hospitalized patients. Among those with malnutrition or with upper gastrointestinal cancer, benefits may exist; however, these were influenced by quality of the study and year of publication.

This content is not available in your region!

Continue researching here.

Having issues? You can contact us here
Accelerating Research

Address

John Eccles House
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom