Parenteral nutrition at home/long-term parenteral nutrition.

PURPOSE: Some diseases require that patients receive parenteral nutrition (PN) over a prolonged time period. Long-term administration of PN can further complicate an already complex therapy, posing additional risk of potential complications. This article is based on presentations and discussions held at the International Safety and Quality of PN Summit, providing insights into aspects of home PN (HPN) and examples of good HPN practice. SUMMARY: One critical step in the HPN process is when patients transition from a hospital to a home setting, and vice versa. Generally, electronic PN ordering is not feasible in an HPN setting, leading to potential difficulties in communication and coordination. HPN requires that patients (or their home caregivers) administer PN, and thus their education and competency are crucial. Likewise, the choice of PN formulation is of great importance. For example, using more modern intravenous lipid emulsions containing medium-chain triglycerides, olive oil, and/or fish oil can provide benefits in terms of liver function during long-term HPN. Internationally, there are wide variations in delivery of HPN, with compounded PN dominating in some countries while others make greater use of market-authorized multichamber bags (MCBs). Patient-related factors, institutional considerations, and the availability of different MCB formulations, are also contributing factors guiding formulation and delivery system preferences. CONCLUSION: Education and communication remain key components of a successful HPN process. The information shared here may help to motivate efforts to improve HPN processes and to consider the often-differing perspectives of patients and their healthcare professionals.

Parenteral nutrition in the hospital setting/short-term parenteral nutrition.

PURPOSE: This article is based on presentations and discussions held at the International Safety and Quality of Parenteral Nutrition (PN) Summit concerning the acute care setting. Some European practices presented in this article do not conform with USP general chapter <797> requirements. Nevertheless, the purpose is to cover the challenges experienced in delivering high-quality PN within hospitals in the United States and Europe, in order to share best practices and experiences more widely. SUMMARY: Core issues regarding the PN process within an acute care setting are largely the same everywhere: There are ongoing pressures for greater efficiency, optimization, and also concurrent commitments to make PN safer for patients. Within Europe, in recent years, the use of market-authorized multi-chamber bags (MCBs) has increased greatly, mainly for safety, cost-effectiveness, and efficiency purposes. However, in the US, hospitals with low PN volumes may face particular challenges, as automated compounding equipment is often unaffordable in this setting and the variety of available MCBs is limited. This can result in the need to operate several PN systems in parallel, adding to the complexity of the PN use process. Ongoing PN quality and safety initiatives from US institutions with various PN volumes are presented. In the future, the availability of a greater selection of MCBs in the US may increase, leading to a reduction in dependence on compounded PN, as has been seen in many European countries. CONCLUSION: The examples presented may encourage improvements in the safety and quality of PN within the acute care setting worldwide.

Expert consensus statements and summary of proceedings from the International Safety and Quality of Parenteral Nutrition Summit.

PURPOSE: The International Safety and Quality of Parenteral Nutrition (PN) Summit consisted of presentations, discussions, and formulation of consensus statements. The purpose here is to briefly summarize the summit and to present the consensus statements. SUMMARY: There was a high degree of consensus, with all statements approved by all authors/summit experts. These consensus statements should be regarded not as formal guidelines but rather as best-practice guidance intended to complement national and international nutrition society evidence-based guidelines and position statements. This article also summarizes key discussion topics from the summit, encompassing up-to-date knowledge and practical guidance concerning PN safety and quality in various countries and clinical settings, focusing on adult patients. Clear geographical differences exist between practices in Europe and the United States, and different approaches to improve the safety, quality, and cost-effectiveness of PN vary, particularly with regard to the delivery systems used. Discussion between experts allowed for an exchange of practical experience in optimizing PN use processes, opportunities for standardization, use of electronic systems, potential improvements in PN formulations, better management during PN component shortages, and practical guidance to address patients' needs, particularly during long-term/home PN. CONCLUSION: The consensus statements are the collective opinion of the panel members and form best-practice guidance. The authors intend that this guidance may help to improve the safety and quality of PN in a variety of settings by bridging the gap between published guideline recommendations and common practical issues.

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.

Clinical classification of adult patients with chronic intestinal failure due to benign disease: An international multicenter cross-sectional survey.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: The aim of the study was to evaluate the applicability of the ESPEN 16-category clinical classification of chronic intestinal failure, based on patients' intravenous supplementation (IVS) requirements for energy and fluids, and to evaluate factors associated with those requirements. METHODS: ESPEN members were invited to participate through ESPEN Council representatives. Participating centers enrolled adult patients requiring home parenteral nutrition for chronic intestinal failure on March 1st 2015. The following patient data were recorded though a structured database: sex, age, body weight and height, intestinal failure mechanism, underlying disease, IVS volume and energy need. RESULTS: Sixty-five centers from 22 countries enrolled 2919 patients with benign disease. One half of the patients were distributed in 3 categories of the ESPEN clinical classification. 9% of patients required only fluid and electrolyte supplementation. IVS requirement varied considerably according to the pathophysiological mechanism of intestinal failure. Notably, IVS volume requirement represented loss of intestinal function better than IVS energy requirement. A simplified 8 category classification of chronic intestinal failure was devised, based on two types of IVS (either fluid and electrolyte alone or parenteral nutrition admixture containing energy) and four categories of volume. CONCLUSIONS: Patients' IVS requirements varied widely, supporting the need for a tool to homogenize patient categorization. This study has devised a novel, simplified eight category IVS classification for chronic intestinal failure that will prove useful in both the clinical and research setting when applied together with the underlying pathophysiological mechanism of the patient's intestinal failure.