These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Comparison of a three-in-one total nutrient mixture with conventional peripheral parenteral nutrition in children.
    Author: Yi DY, Yang HR.
    Journal: Asia Pac J Clin Nutr; 2015; 24(1):44-50. PubMed ID: 25740741.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to compare clinical aspects of the application of three-in-one total nutrient mixture (TNA) for peripheral parenteral nutrition (PPN) with those of the conventional PPN (cPPN) method of providing short-term parenteral nutrition for pediatric inpatients. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study in children from 2 to 18 years old who were hospitalized and underwent PPN administration. We compared clinical aspects of two methods of PPN, cPPN (n=39) and TNA (n=57). RESULTS: The mean age was 6.5±3.1 years in the cPPN group and 8.2±3.4years in the TNA group (p=0.015). In the TNA group, there was a significantly shorter period between the day of admission and the first day of PPN or oral feeding (p<0.0001 & p<0.0001, respectively).The TNA group also fasted for a shorter period before PN after admission, and the total duration of fasting was also shorter (p<0.0001 & p<0.0001, respectively). The TNA group showed a lower glucose infusion rate and fewer daily administered total calories per weight (p<0.0001 & p=0.001, respectively). However, there was no significant difference in the amount of administered amino acids and lipids (p=0.584 & p=0.650, respectively) and PPN-related complications. CONCLUSIONS: When providing nutrients to hospitalized children who cannot take in enough nutrients via the enteral route, TNA formula may be an easier and faster method than cPPN. 背景：本研究的目的为儿科住院病人提供短期三合一的全营养混合液(TNA)与 采用外周静脉营养（PPN）的传统肠外营养（cPPN）的临床应用进行比较。 方法：我们对2 到18 岁的住院并接受了肠外营养的儿童进行回顾性研究。对 PPN 和cPPN （39 例）与TNA （57 例）两种营养的方法进行临床效果比较。 结果：cPPN 组和TNA 组的平均年龄分别为6.5±3.1 岁和8.2±3.4（p=0.015） 岁。在TNA 组中，入院当天到开始PPN 或者口服的第一天的时间明显缩短 （p<0.0001 、 p<0.0001）。TNA 组还缩短了在入院后肠外营养前的时间，总 的空腹时间也缩短了(p<0.0001 、 p<0.0001)。TNA 组的结果显示较低的葡萄 糖输液率，更少的每日单位体重总热量摄入（p<0.0001 、p=0.001）。但是， 氨基酸和脂类摄入量与PPN 相关并发症之间无显著差异（ p=0.584 、 p=0.650）。结论：当为那些不能通过肠内途径摄取足够营养的住院儿童提供 营养时，TNA 比cPPN 更简便快捷。
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]