Quality of life and length of survival in advanced cancer patients on home parenteral nutrition.

BACKGROUND: The use of home parenteral nutrition (HPN) in patients with advanced cancer is controversial because survival is usually short and there are no data regarding the quality of life (QoL). METHODS: Sixty-nine advanced cancer patients enrolled in a program of HPN in six different Italian centers were prospectively studied as regards nutritional status (body weight, serum albumin, serum transferrin and total lymphocyte count), length of survival and QoL through the Rotterdam Symptom Checklist questionnaire. These variables were collected at the start of HPN and then at monthly intervals. All these patients were severely malnourished, almost aphagic and beyond any possibility of cure. RESULTS: Nutritional indices maintained stable until death. Median survival was 4 months (range 1-14) and about one-third of patients survived more than 7 months. QoL parameters remained stable till 2-3 months before death. CONCLUSIONS: HPN may benefit a limited percentage of patients who may survive longer than the time allowed by a condition of starvation and depletion. Provided that these patients survive longer than 3 months, there is some evidence that QoL remains stable for some months and acceptable for the patients.

Central venous catheter complications in 447 patients on home parenteral nutrition: an analysis of over 100.000 catheter days.

RATIONALE: The purpose of this study is to report the frequency of central venous catheter (CVC) complications and to analyze the potential risk factors for complications requiring CVC removal in home parenteral nutrition (HPN) patients. METHODS: A questionnaire developed by the ESPEN HAN WORKING GROUP was distributed to 12 European centers to investigate the complications occurring during the period between January 1995 and December 2000 when HPN patients used their first CVC. The questionnaire collected informations related to the Home Parenteral Nutrition technique and the underlying disease. Factors affecting the time of CVC removal were jointly investigated using Cox's multivariable regression models. RESULTS: The study was performed on 447 patients for a total of 110869 CVC-days. Complications occurred in about 1/4 of patients, approximately half were infections and about half required Central Venous Catheter removal. The Cox analysis showed that using the CVC 7 times/week and implanted ports were associated with a hazard ratio of 3 and 2.8, respectively. A reduced risk of removal (of about 40%) was associated with using CVC also for non-nutritional purposes (P = 0.0016). CONCLUSIONS: Within the limits of this retrospective investigation, the type of CVC, the type of administration of HPN and the type of training are important factors associated with occurrence of complications or with CVC removal. However, in our opinion, proper care of the CVC, of preparation and administration of the nutritive admixture seem to be paramount for a safe management of HPN.