[Total enteral nutrition versus mixed enteral and parenteral nutrition in patients at an intensive care unit]. Enteral nutrition is superior to parenteral nutrition in severe acute pancreatitis: results of a randomized prospective trial. Enteral versus parenteral nutrition: effects on gastrointestinal function and metabolism. [A randomized controlled study of total parenteral nutrition and enteral nutrition by elemental and polymeric diet as primary therapy in active phase of Crohn's disease].
To compare metabolic, nutritional and epidemiological data in two groups of patients, one receiving total enteral nutrition, via nasoenteric tube, and one receiving both enteral and parenteral nutrition.
                A prospective, randomized study.
                A general ICU, with both medical and surgical patients, in a big regional University and National Health Service hospital.
                24 patients requiring Intensive Care after major surgery or because suffering from severe head injury or major neurological impairment.
                All patients initially received total parenteral nutrition: after 4 days 12 patients were "weaned" to total enteral nutrition and 12 stayed on mixed parenteral and enteral nutrition. LABORATORY INVESTIGATIONS AND OBSERVATIONAL DATA: Blood levels of albumin, prealbumin, transferrin, ALT, AST, bilirubin, blood urea, blood glucose, total linfocite count, and nutritional and epidemiological data such as nitrogen balance, calorie intake, diarrhea incidence, blood and sputum cultures and radiologic evidence of pneumonia are analysed.
                At T1, NET patients were able to reduce their nitrogen losses (0.27.1 g/kg +/-0.12 vs 0.35 +/- 0.13 at TO; p < 0.05) and improve nitrogen balance (-9 +/- 7 vs -2 +/- 6 at T0; p < 0.05); they also had a better total linfocite count (2034 +/- 304 vs. 1413 +/- 360 of the MISTA group; p < 0.05), and a lower incidence of pneumonia as documented by sputum cultures and radiograms.
                Patients fed with both parenteral and enteral nutrition did no better than those on total enteral nutrition as far as nutritional and metabolic indices were concerned; they also seemed more prone to infections than those on total enteral nutrition, indicating that mixed nutrition may result in more stable feeding, but this does not seem to have any beneficial nutritional, immunological and metabolic effect. Parenteral nutrition is well established for providing nutritional support in acute pancreatitis while avoiding pancreatic stimulation. However, it is associated with complications and high cost. Benefits of enteral feeding in other disease states prompted a comparison of early enteral feeding with total parenteral nutrition in this clinical setting.
                Thirty-eight patients with acute severe pancreatitis were randomized into two groups. The first (n = 18) received enteral nutrition through a nasoenteric tube with a semi-elemental diet, while the second group (n = 20) received parenteral nutrition through a central venous catheter. Safety was assessed by clinical course of disease, laboratory findings and incidence of complications. Efficacy was determined by nitrogen balance. The cost of nutritional support was calculated.
                Enteral feeding was well tolerated without adverse effects on the course of the disease. Patients who received enteral feeding experienced fewer total complications (P < 0.05) and were at lower risk of developing septic complications (P < 0.01) than those receiving parenteral nutrition. The cost of nutritional support was three times higher in patients who received parenteral nutrition.
                This study suggests that early enteral nutrition should be used preferentially in patients with severe acute pancreatitis. The effects of total parenteral nutrition (TPN) versus enteral nutrition (TEN) were studied in 34 patients following major neurosurgery. Measurements were made of resting energy expenditure (REE), urea production rate (UPR), visceral proteins, parameters of liver and pancreas function, as well as gastrointestinal absorption. To predict nutritional status, nutritional index (NI) was calculated. UPR revealed no significant differences between the groups. After 12 days of TEN, however, synthesis of visceral proteins increased significantly. In addition, NI improved after TEN (p < 0.05), whereas it remained unchanged after TPN. Thrombocyte and lymphocyte counts rose predominately during enteral nutrition. Only in the TEN group was REE increased by 18% and Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) enhanced from Day 6 on. Exogenous insulin demand was enhanced in the parenterally fed group, and bilirubin (p < 0.05), amylase (p < 0.05), and lipase (p < 0.01) rose significantly, as did gamma-glutamyl-transferase (p < 0.0005) and alkaline phosphatase (p < 0.0005). After 12 d of TPN, vitamin A absorption was significantly attenuated, indicating reduced fat absorption compared to TEN. Carbohydrate absorption did not show significant changes between the groups. Only during TPN did mean values of xylose absorption remain below the normal range. Therefore, enteral nutrition following neurosurgical procedures is associated with an accelerated normalization of nutritional status and an improved substrate tolerance. TEN opposes early postoperative absorption disturbances of the small intestine. We performed randomized controlled study to compare the short-term therapeutic effect of total parenteral nutrition (TPN), elemental diet (ED) and polymeric diet (PD) given as primary therapy in active phase of Crohn's disease. In hospital for Crohn's disease, twenty-eight patients were given nutritional therapy: 9 patients by TPN, 10 by ED, and 9 by PD. Nutritional state, inflammatory reactions, disease activity and clinical remission rate were assessed two weeks and four weeks after treatment, and morphological findings were assessed before and after each nutritional therapy by radiographic and colonoscopic findings. Inflammatory reactions were more effectively controlled by TPN and ED than by PD, and early improvement achieved by TPN and ED was especially note-worthy. Clinical remission rate after treatment by TPN was highest in three types of nutritional approach, but no significant difference was seen at any point. In nutritional state, disease activity and morphological findings, comparable changes were effected without preference. These results suggest that nutritional therapy by total parenteral nutrition and elemental diet is superior to polymeric diet for treating active phase of Crohn's disease with marked inflammatory reactions.
It was not possible to draw any firm conclusions on the effect of enteral and parenteral nutrition on the prevention and treatment of pressure ulcers. Further trials of high methodological quality are necessary.