Home enteral and parenteral nutritional support: a comparison

Chrysomilides, Sonia A.; Kaminski, Mitchell V.

doi:10.1093/ajcn/34.10.2271

Cited by 27 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…" . , Common, and ~s usually easily controlled 41 by manipulating the rate and concentration of feedings [91][92][93][94][95][96][97][98]. A notable exception is the diarrhea associated with the infusion of bacterially contaminated feedings into the small bowel, which may result in a syndrome of nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, fever, leukocytosis, hypotension, and lachycardia.…”

Section: Je]unostom Vmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Enteral and parenteral feeding in the dysphagic patient

Sitzmann

Mueller

1988

Dysphagia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Thc inercasing rccognition of malnutrition among hospitalized patients has spawned a variety of sophisticated forms of nutritional support. Dysphagic patients, in particular, are easily identifiable and present with varying degrees of nutritional compromise thai complicate the underlying swallowing disorder. Choice of therapeutic modalities available and their relative risks and benefits are reviewed.

show abstract

Section: Je]unostom Vmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There has been a series of 130 percutaneous transgastric (nonendoscopic) jejunostomies reported, with a major complication rate of 0.8% [109]. As with nasogastric or gastrostomy feeding, enteral feeding through a jejunostomy may cost from one-eighth to one-third thai of total parenteral nutrition [93,95,96,10In 102].…”

Section: Je]unostom Vmentioning

confidence: 99%

Enteral and parenteral feeding in the dysphagic patient

Sitzmann

Mueller

1988

Dysphagia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Variations of this diet were used for postoperative nasojejunal feeding by groups at the University of Pennsylvania and at Bellevue. 21,11,13,96 Homogenized Milk Case et al19 popularized the use of homogenized milk as an inexpensive, readily available, and easy to use intrajejunal diet. Homogenization of the milk rendered the diet better tolerated.…”

Section: Hollander Formulamentioning

confidence: 99%

Intrajejunal Feeding: Development and Current Status

Ryan

Page

1984

J Parenter Enteral Nutr

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Techniques of jejunostomy were established in surgical practice by the turn of the century. They were mainly used to administer normal food for the palliation of advanced gastric cancer. Standard postoperative intravenous fluid therapy did not begin in earnest until the late 1930's and did not become routine until the late 1940's because of pyrogens, fear of fluid overload, and commercial nonavailability. For most gastric procedures performed from 1900 until 1940, postoperative treatment consisted of nutrient and saline enemas and subcutaneous infusion of fluid. Jejunal feedings had their greatest use between 1930 and 1950. Gastrectomy was widely applied for cancer and ulcers in dehydrated, malnourished patients. The importance of hypoproteinemia and malnutrition on postoperative morbidity and mortality was established, and the inability of subcutaneous infusions and nutrient enemas to counteract malnutrition and dehydration was recognized. Jejunostomy or nasojejunal tubes were recommended for routine use after gastric operations. During this period, the major advances in jejunal diets and methods of feeding were accomplished. Attention was paid to assuring adequate amounts of nutrients, minerals, and vitamins, and finding diets that were easily tolerated by the jejunum. Important in these developments was the collaboration of surgeons with physiologists, gastroenterologists, pharmacologists, and members of industry. Several factors combined to reduce the use of jejunostomy after 1950. Intravenous therapy became familiar to the surgical profession, widely available, and safe. The number of gastric resections performed has decreased. Earlier referral for operation has resulted in patients with less preoperative debility and malnutrition. By 1970, total parenteral nutrition was available, and fewer jejunostomies were perceived as necessary. During the same interval, however, the increasing incidence of patients with pancreatic, esophageal, and hepatobiliary disease who faced major operations and catabolic postoperative courses presented a new challenge to the surgical community. A resurgence of concern for nutritional support, in part generated by the availability of total parenteral nutrition, prompted a renewed interest in using the gut for feeding the postoperative patient. This renewed interest, an understanding of the techniques of parenteral nutrition, the rediscovery of the gut as an absorptive surface in the postoperative patient, and the ready availability of a variety of defined formula diets have combined to rekindle the enthusiasm of many surgeons for complementary or adjuvant feeding jejunostomy.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)

show abstract

“…Progress continued throughout the past two decades with developments such as enteral tube materials like polyurethane and silicone suitable for longer term placement,' and commercially produced com-plete diet formulations as effective as parenteral formulations. [2][3][4][5][6] Appropriate diet delivery systems are required for a number of reasons including: (1) inability to swallow because of disease (for example -head and neck, oesophageal tumours; neurological -multiple sclerosis, stroke); (2) palatability of commercially produced enteral diets often precludes oral administration; (3) volume of feed (sometimes up to 2-5 1/24 h) may be difficult for some patients (for example the elderly) to consume).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Technical aspects of enteral nutrition.

Keymling¹

1994

Gut

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Home enteral and parenteral nutritional support: a comparison

Cited by 27 publications

References 8 publications

Enteral and parenteral feeding in the dysphagic patient

Enteral and parenteral feeding in the dysphagic patient

Intrajejunal Feeding: Development and Current Status

Technical aspects of enteral nutrition.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About