ArticleEuropean journal of clinical nutrition2014
Composition of personalized and standard nutritional mixtures in patients on home parenteral nutrition.
Article in European journal of clinical nutrition, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Macronutrients in Parenteral Nutrition: Amino Acids.Nutrients · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
objectivesThe compounding of personalized parenteral nutrition mixtures (PPNMs) for home parenteral nutrition (HPN) gives the possibility to better satisfy nutritional requirements for patients in selected clinical conditions. The objective of this study was to compare the composition of PPNMs prescribed in selected cases, by a practitioner nutritionist, with that of industrially manufactured standard parenteral nutrition mixtures (SPNMs). SUBJECTS/
methodsTwo hundred and ninety-eight patients (151 men, 147 women, aged 17-87 years) on HPN, followed up in 2011 at our Center, were retrospectively recruited.
resultsIndustrially manufactured SPNMs were prescribed in 230 (77.2%) patients, whereas compounded PPNMs were prescribed in 68 (22.8%). Formulation of PPNMs, adjusted for body weight, did not significantly differ from SPNMs as regards total daily calorie amount, but was significantly different as far as nutrient composition is concerned (P<0.01). Analysis on the daily amount of nutrients per kg of body weight and per patient disease showed that 16/34 (47%) benign chronic intestinal failure (CIF) patients, 47/233 (20%) cancer patients and 5/31 (16%) patients grouped as 'having other diseases' needed personalized mixtures (in PPNMs 4-9 nutrients were significantly different from those in SPNMs). Moreover, in CIF patients receiving PPNMs, frequent changes in the formulation (mean 6 times per year, range 1-28) were necessary.
conclusionsOur data suggest that, presently, PPNMs cannot be completely replaced by SPNMs owing to special needs in macro and/or micronutrients of some patients and/or the necessity of frequent changes in the nutritional mixture composition, at least until stabilization of clinical and metabolic conditions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.