Intravenous supplementation type and volume are associated with 1-year outcome and major complications in patients with chronic intestinal failure.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: No marker to categorise the severity of chronic intestinal failure (CIF) has been developed. A 1-year international survey was carried out to investigate whether the European Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism clinical classification of CIF, based on the type and volume of the intravenous supplementation (IVS), could be an indicator of CIF severity. METHODS: At baseline, participating home parenteral nutrition (HPN) centres enrolled all adults with ongoing CIF due to non-malignant disease; demographic data, body mass index, CIF mechanism, underlying disease, HPN duration and IVS category were recorded for each patient. The type of IVS was classified as fluid and electrolyte alone (FE) or parenteral nutrition admixture (PN). The mean daily IVS volume, calculated on a weekly basis, was categorised as <1, 1-2, 2-3 and >3 L/day. The severity of CIF was determined by patient outcome (still on HPN, weaned from HPN, deceased) and the occurrence of major HPN/CIF-related complications: intestinal failure-associated liver disease (IFALD), catheter-related venous thrombosis and catheter-related bloodstream infection (CRBSI). RESULTS: Fifty-one HPN centres included 2194 patients. The analysis showed that both IVS type and volume were independently associated with the odds of weaning from HPN (significantly higher for PN <1 L/day than for FE and all PN >1 L/day), patients' death (lower for FE, p=0.079), presence of IFALD cholestasis/liver failure and occurrence of CRBSI (significantly higher for PN 2-3 and PN >3 L/day). CONCLUSIONS: The type and volume of IVS required by patients with CIF could be indicators to categorise the severity of CIF in both clinical practice and research protocols.

Home parenteral nutrition provision modalities for chronic intestinal failure in adult patients: An international survey.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: The safety and effectiveness of a home parenteral nutrition (HPN) program depends both on the expertise and the management approach of the HPN center. We aimed to evaluate both the approaches of different international HPN-centers in their provision of HPN and the types of intravenous supplementation (IVS)-admixtures prescribed to patients with chronic intestinal failure (CIF). METHODS: In March 2015, 65 centers from 22 countries enrolled 3239 patients (benign disease 90.1%, malignant disease 9.9%), recording the patient, CIF and HPN characteristics in a structured database. The HPN-provider was categorized as health care system local pharmacy (LP) or independent home care company (HCC). The IVS-admixture was categorized as fluids and electrolytes alone (FE) or parenteral nutrition, either commercially premixed (PA) or customized to the individual patient (CA), alone or plus extra FE (PAFE or CAFE). Doctors of HPN centers were responsible for the IVS prescriptions. RESULTS: HCC (66%) was the most common HPN provider, with no difference noted between benign-CIF and malignant-CIF. LP was the main modality in 11 countries; HCC prevailed in 4 European countries: Israel, USA, South America and Oceania (p < 0.001). IVS-admixture comprised: FE 10%, PA 17%, PAFE 17%, CA 38%, CAFE 18%. PA and PAFE prevailed in malignant-CIF while CA and CAFE use was greater in benign-CIF (p < 0.001). PA + PAFE prevailed in those countries where LP was the main HPN-provider and CA + CAFE prevailed where the main HPN-provider was HCC (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to demonstrate that HPN provision and the IVS-admixture differ greatly among countries, among HPN centers and between benign-CIF and cancer-CIF. As both HPN provider and IVS-admixture types may play a role in the safety and effectiveness of HPN therapy, criteria to homogenize HPN programs are needed so that patients can have equal access to optimal CIF care.