Premium
A.S.P.E.N. Position Paper
Author(s) -
Vanek Vincent W.,
Seidner Douglas L.,
Allen Penny,
Bistrian Bruce,
Collier Sharon,
Gura Kathleen,
Miles John M.,
Valentine Christina J.,
Kochevar Marty
Publication year - 2012
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 - 10.1177/0884533612439896
Subject(s) - medicine , proinflammatory cytokine , fish oil , olive oil , linoleic acid , fatty acid , soybean oil , food science , fish <actinopterygii> , biochemistry , biology , pathology , fishery , inflammation
The currently available, standard soybean oil (SO)–based intravenous fat emulsions (IVFEs) meet the needs of most parenteral nutrition (PN) patients. There are alternative oil‐based fat emulsions, such as medium‐chain triglycerides (MCTs), olive oils (OOs), and fish oils (FOs), that, based on extensive usage in Europe, have an equivalent safety profile to SO. These alternative IVFEs are metabolized via different pathways, which may lead to less proinflammatory effects and less immune suppression. These alternative oil‐based IVFEs are not currently available in the United States. Many patients who require IVFEs are already in a compromised state. Such patients could potentially have better clinical outcomes when receiving one of the alternative IVFEs to diminish the intake of the potentially proinflammatory ω‐6 fatty acid—linoleic acid—which comprises more than 50% of the fatty acid profile in SO. Further research is needed on these alternative oil‐based IVFEs to identify which IVFE oils or which combination of oils may be most clinically useful for specific patient populations.