RESUMO
PURPOSE: This study was designed to investigate the effects of total parenteral nutrition (PN) using different lipid emulsions in patients undergoing major abdominal surgery. METHODS: Fifty-two patients were randomized to receive soybean oil + medium chain triglycerides (MCT) (group I), soybean oil + olive oil (group II), soybean oil + olive oil + fish oil (group III) as a lipid source. PN was started on postoperative day 1 and patients were maintained on PN for a minimum period of 4 days. Laboratory variables (CRP, prealbumin, transferrin) were measured before surgery and on postoperative days. RESULTS: Three treatment groups were included in the study. Patients in group I received long chain triglycerides (LCT) + LCT/MCT emulsion (%75 LCT + %25 LCT/MCT); Patients in group II received olive oil based emulsion (80% olive oil + 20% soybean oil, ClinOleic); Patients in group III received fish oil in addition to olive oil based emulsion (%85 ClinOleic + %15 Omegaven; Fresenius Kabi). The following 14 parameters were assessed: body weight, CRP, prealbumin, transferrin, tumor necrosis factor-α, interleukin-6, total antioxidant status, thiobarbituric acid reactive substances, oxidized low density lipoprotein-2, complete blood cell, international normalized ratio, D-dimer, activated partially thromboplastin time, prothrombin time. All other parameters showed no differences among the groups. CONCLUSION: The results of our trial demonstrate a potential beneficial effect of soybean oil/olive oil based lipid emulsions for use in PN regarding inflammatory response and oxidant capacity in the treatment of patients.
RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Although a variety of nutritional indices have been found to be valuable in predicting patient outcome when used alone, there is no consensus on the best method for assessing the nutritional status of hospitalized patients. Therefore, the aim of this study was to assess the nutritional status of a cohort of patients who underwent major elective surgery using the Nutritional Risk Index (NRI), Maastricht Index (MI), Subjective Global Assessment (SGA), and Mini Nutritional Assessment (MNA) to determine the best possible nutrition screening system in surgical practice. METHODS: The study population consisted of 460 patients who underwent major elective surgery between December 1999 and March 2002. Each patient had a complete set of the three nutritional assessment techniques (NRI, MI, SGA); in addition, the MNA was performed in patients older than 59 years of age. One of the coauthors who was unaware of the nutritional assessments assessed the patients for postoperative morbidity and mortality. Complications were classified as major or minor and as infectious or noninfectious. To assess the predictive value of the assessment techniques, likelihood ratios were calculated for the various strata of each method. The odds ratio and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were also calculated to describe and compare the diagnostic value of each of the four nutrition indices. RESULTS: Twenty patients died during the study period. No complications occurred in 329 of the 460 patients; 42 patients suffered from two or more complications. The frequency of malnutrition was found to be 58.3%, 63.5%, and 67.4% as assessed by the SGA, NRI, and MI, respectively. Morbidity rates, especially severe infectious and noninfectious complications, were significantly higher in malnourished patients in all nutritional indices. The likelihood ratio was well correlated with the risk categories of every nutritional index. The area under the ROC curves revealed that each scoring system proved to be significantly powerful in predicting the morbidity (infectious and noninfectious severe morbidity) and mortality. However, no differences were detected among the nutritional indices in 460 patients. The odds ratio for morbidity between the well nourished and malnourished patients was 3.09 [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.96-4.88], 3.47 (95% CI, 2.12-5.68), 2.30 (95% CI, 1.43-3.71), and 2.81 (95% CI, 0.79-9.95) for the SGA, NRI, MI, and MNA, respectively. All indices except the MNA were significantly predictive for morbidity. The odds ratios were not statistically different among the indices. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings revealed that all nutritional assessment techniques can be safely applied to the clinical setting with no significant difference in predictive value. We therefore strongly recommend the use of any of these techniques to improve the outcome of surgical care. Meanwhile, further investigations are needed, and much effort must be given to find the best method for assessing nutritional status.
