Premium
Clinical Experience With Numeta in Preterm Infants
Author(s) -
Kreissl Alexandra,
Repa Andreas,
Binder Christoph,
Thanhaeuser Margarita,
Jilma Bernd,
Berger Angelika,
Haiden Nadja
Publication year - 2016
Publication title -
journal of parenteral and enteral nutrition
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.935
H-Index - 98
eISSN - 1941-2444
pISSN - 0148-6071
DOI - 10.1177/0148607115569733
Subject(s) - medicine , parenteral nutrition , medical prescription , clinical nutrition , hepatology , pediatrics , enteral administration , pediatric gastroenterology , observational study , neonatology , intensive care medicine , pregnancy , pharmacology , biology , genetics
Background: A new “ready‐to‐use” triple‐chamber container, Numeta (Baxter, Deerfield, IL), is available for preterm parenteral nutrition (PN) to provide nutrients according to the recommendations of the European Society for Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition (ESPGHAN) and the European Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism (ESPEN) Guidelines for Pediatric Parenteral Nutrition. We investigated the clinical application of Numeta compared with individualized PN in preterm infants (≤1.500 g) and evaluated the effects on nutrient intake, costs, and preparation time. Materials and Methods: In a clinical observational study, prescriptions for preterm infants were performed with the new prescription software catoPAN (Cato Software Solutions, Becton Dickinson, Vienna, Austria). Individualized PN and Numeta prescriptions were mirrored, and nutrition content of the PNs was compared with each other and with ESPGHAN/ESPEN recommendations. Furthermore, costs and preparation time were assessed. Results: In total, 374 PN solutions (>1000 g [n = 333]/≤1000 g [n = 41]) were analyzed. Protein intake with Numeta was significantly lower compared with individualized PN and did not meet the recommendations for infants <1500 g during the first day and the period of transition after birth. Energy intake was significantly higher with Numeta. The costs for Numeta preparations were €18 (about US$20) higher than for individualized PN. However, the preparation time/solution was 2 minutes faster with Numeta. Conclusion: Numeta is an alternative to individualized PN for infants >1000 g in the period of stable growth when enteral feedings have already started. Protein intake is significantly lower than in individualized PN solutions. Numeta is more expensive in comparison to individualized PN but saves human resources.