Search

Short bowel syndrome is a severe malabsorption disorder, and prolonged parenteral nutrition is essential for survival in some cases. Among the undesirable effects of long-term parenteral nutrition is an increase in proinflammatory cytokines. The aim of the present study was to measure the serum levels of interleukin-6, interleukin-10, tumor necrosis factor alpha, and transforming growth factor beta, in patients with short bowel syndrome on cyclic parenteral nutrition and patients who had previously received but no longer require parenteral nutrition. The study was cross-sectional and observational. Three groups were studied as follows: Parenteral nutrition group, 9 patients with short bowel syndrome that receive cyclic parenteral nutrition; Oral nutrition group, 10 patients with the same syndrome who had been weaned off parenteral nutrition for at least 1 year prior to the study; Control group, 13 healthy adults, matched for age and sex to parenteral and oral groups. The following data were collected: age, tobacco use, drug therapies, dietary intake, body weight, height, blood collection. All interleukins were significantly higher in the parenteral group compared with the control group as follows: interleukin-6: 22 ± 19 vs 1.5 ± 1.4 pg/mL, P = .0002; transforming growth factor β : 854 ± 204 vs 607 ± 280 pg/mL, P = .04; interleukin-10: 8 ± 37 vs 0.6 ± 4, P = .03; tumor necrosis factor α : 20 ± 8 vs 8 ± 4 pg/mL, P < .0001. We concluded that parenteral nutrition in short bowel syndrome patients, regardless of its duration, increases serum proinflammatory cytokines. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Short bowel syndrome is associated with weight loss due to nutrient, electrolyte and fluid malabsorption. In view of the pathophysiology of SBS, all patients would be expected to exhibit similar clinical signs and symptoms, whereas many variations occur probably due to the adaptive capacity of the remaining small intestine in order to compensate for the resected area.Objective: To determine whether there is a difference in nutritional status and food intake between patients receiving PNT, patients who do not receive PNT but are monitored on an ambulatory basis, and control subjects, and 2) to determine body composition by two different methods, i.e., electrical bioimpedance and skin fold measurement.Methods: This was a case-control study where the subjects were divided into three groups: parenteral group (PG) - adults with a history of SBS intermittently using PNT; ambulatory group (AG) - adults with a history of SBS who do not receive PNT; control group (CG) - adults with no history of intestinal resections and/or use of PNT. The volunteers were submitted to measurements of body weight, height, body composition by bioimpedance analysis and assessment of food intake using a food frequency questionnaire. Univariate analysis of variance (ANOVA) with the aid of the SAS® 9.2. software, using the PROC GLM feature. The Student t-test was used to compare the instruments for the assessment of body composition, with the aid of the PROC TTEST feature of the SAS® 9.2 software.Results: Thirty-two volunteers, 19 women and 13 men, participated in the study. The PNT group consisted of 9 volunteers, 4 women and 5 men, with a mean (± SD) age of 57 ± 9 years. The nutrition status and food intake were different between the groups. There was no difference in percent body fat measured by anthropometry and bioimpedance analysis.Discussion and Conclusion: Large resections, as well as the resected portions, explain the greater nutritional impairment of PG compared to AG and CG, although no significant difference in food consumption was detected between these three groups. Since the use of PNT can lead to a state of hyperhydration, the results of BIA should be interpreted with caution, in view of the fact that the lean mass determined by this method varies positively with the hydration state of an individual. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Short bowel syndrome is associated with weight loss due to nutrient, electrolyte and fluid malabsorption. In view of the pathophysiology of SBS, all patients would be expected to exhibit similar clinical signs and symptoms, whereas many variations occur probably due to the adaptive capacity of the remaining small intestine in order to compensate for the resected area. Objective: To determine whether there is a difference in nutritional status and food intake between patients receiving PNT, patients who do not receive PNT but are monitored on an ambulatory basis, and control subjects, and 2) to determine body composition by two different methods, i.e., electrical bioimpedance and skin fold measurement. Methods: This was a case-control study where the subjects were divided into three groups: parenteral group (PG) – adults with a history of SBS intermittently using PNT; ambulatory group (AG) – adults with a history of SBS who do not receive PNT; control group (CG) – adults with no history of intestinal resections and/or use of PNT. The volunteers were submitted to measurements of body weight, height, body composition by bioimpedance analysis and assessment of food intake using a food frequency questionnaire. Univariate analysis of variance (ANOVA) with the aid of the SAS® 9.2. software, using the PROC GLM feature. The Student t-test was used to compare the instruments for the assessment of body composition, with the aid of the PROC TTEST feature of the SAS® 9.2 software. Results: Thirty-two volunteers, 19 women and 13 men, participated in the study. The PNT group consisted of 9 volunteers, 4 women and 5 men, with a mean (± SD) age of 57 ± 9 years. The nutrition status and food intake were different between the groups. There was no difference in percent body fat measured by anthropometry and bioimpedance analysis. Discussion and conclusion: Large resections, as well as the resected portions, explain the greater nutritional impairment of PG compared to AG and CG, although no significant difference in food consumption was detected between these three groups. Since the use of PNT can lead to a state of hyperhydration, the results of BIA should be interpreted with caution, in view of the fact that the lean mass determined by this method varies positively with the hydration state of an individual. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]