Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Parenteral nutrition.

Paul Kitchen1, Alastair Forbes

  • 1St. Mary's Hospital, London, United Kingdom.

Current Opinion in Gastroenterology
|February 11, 2005
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Parenteral nutrition (PN) offers no benefits over enteral nutrition in gastrointestinal cancer patients and has more complications. PN does not prevent antioxidant decline post-surgery and poses infection risks.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Potential time-sensitive biomarkers for the detection of acute mesenteric ischaemia: a systematic review of animal data.

Biomarkers : biochemical indicators of exposure, response, and susceptibility to chemicals·2026
Same author

Alterations of vitamin D metabolism and requirements in clinical conditions with impaired gastro-intestinal and renal function and in critical illness.

The Journal of steroid biochemistry and molecular biology·2025
Same author

One-year survival and quality of life after acute mesenteric ischemia: Follow-up of the AMESI study.

The journal of trauma and acute care surgery·2025
Same author

Priority setting for nutrition research in individuals with spinal cord injury: A protocol for Delphi study among health professionals.

PloS one·2025
Same author

Comparison between endovascular and surgical treatment of acute arterial occlusive mesenteric ischemia.

World journal of emergency surgery : WJES·2025
Same author

Radiological diagnosis of acute mesenteric ischemia in adult patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Scientific reports·2025

Area of Science:

  • Clinical Nutrition
  • Surgical Oncology
  • Intensive Care Medicine

Background:

  • Parenteral nutrition (PN) is a critical intervention for patients unable to receive adequate nutrition enterally.
  • Ongoing research seeks to optimize PN efficacy and safety, particularly in complex patient populations.
  • Comparative effectiveness and complication profiles of different nutritional support methods require continuous evaluation.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To evaluate the efficacy and safety of parenteral nutrition (PN) compared to enteral nutrition in gastrointestinal cancer patients.
  • To assess the metabolic and clinical advantages of intraportal versus systemic venous nutritional support.
  • To investigate PN's impact on antioxidant capacity, infection risk, and specific complications like hepatic abnormalities and osteoporosis.

Main Methods:

Related Experiment Videos

  • Comparative analysis of parenteral nutrition versus enteral nutrition in gastrointestinal cancer patients.
  • Evaluation of intraportal versus systemic venous routes for nutritional support.
  • Assessment of antioxidant capacity changes post-major surgery in patients receiving PN.
  • Analysis of feeding line-associated candidiasis risk in intensive care settings.
  • Investigation into the effects of choline and clodronate on PN-related complications.

Main Results:

  • Parenteral nutrition (PN) showed no advantage over enteral nutrition in gastrointestinal cancer patients, with a higher complication rate.
  • Intraportal nutritional support demonstrated potential metabolic and clinical benefits compared to systemic venous delivery.
  • PN did not prevent the reduction in antioxidant capacity following major surgery.
  • Feeding lines used for PN were identified as a risk factor for systemic candidiasis in intensive care.
  • The conventional percutaneous access route for PN was confirmed as safe, even in infants.
  • Choline supplementation may mitigate some hepatic issues related to PN, while clodronate showed limited efficacy in preventing osteoporosis progression.

Conclusions:

  • Enteral nutrition is preferred over parenteral nutrition (PN) for gastrointestinal cancer patients due to similar efficacy and lower complication rates.
  • Intraportal PN may offer specific advantages, warranting further investigation.
  • PN does not negate the need for antioxidant support post-surgery and introduces infection risks, necessitating careful management.
  • Standard percutaneous access is safe, and adjunct therapies like choline show promise for managing PN-related complications.