Nutritional science consists of multiple overlapping disciplines: agricultural science including animal husbandry; food science; public health; nutritional physiology; and therapeutic or clinical nutrition. The application of nutritional science to clinical practice has undoubtedly resulted in improved survival and improved quality of life in certain groups of patients. It has also resulted in new concepts that are not only of fundamental importance to physiology and human biology, but also to the development of new therapeutic strategies. Several of these new concepts have arisen from three interrelated areas that are essentially unique to human and veterinary clinical nutrition. These are:(1) the consequences of bypassing the gut, which occurs during intravenous nutrition; (2) the effects of administering nutrients in quantities and proportions that are not normally possible with normal diets; (3) the effects of using continuous feeding over 24 h rather than intermittent feeding.
B Y P A S S I N G THE G U T
Bacteriological, metabolic and clinical consequencesMammals have evolved complex biochemical, immunological and mechanical defence systems that are located at the interfaces between the external environment and their own tissues, i.e. the integument, the gastrointestinal tract and the respiratory tract. The administration of feeds directly into central veins bypasses all these defences, making infection much more likely. Indeed, in the early 1970s, just a few years after the first successful use of prolonged parenteral nutrition in man (Dudrick et al. 1968) was hailed as one of the most important advances in nutritional support for decades, serious infections, mainly in the form of catheter-related sepsis, became a major problem. Catheter-related sepsis occurred in as many as 25-30% of patients being fed parenterally. In the late 1970s the incidence of catheter-related sepsis was reduced to about 5% in many centres, because the central line came to be regarded as a 'lifeline' for administration of feed only and not for the convenience of administering blood products, drugs and fluids, or for withdrawing blood, especially by individuals not employing strict aseptic techniques. In the 1980s the incidence of catheter-related sepsis was reduced further to about 3% through the use of polyurethane catheters which replaced the older more 'adhesive' and thrombogenic polyvinyl catheters which were more likely to predispose to bacterial seeding. In the 1990s new catheters coated with silver sulphaavailable at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi