Home parenteral nutrition provision modalities for chronic intestinal failure in adult patients:An international survey

Background & aims: The safety and effectiveness of a home parenteral nutrition (HPN) program depends both on the expertise and the management approach of the HPN center. We aimed to evaluate both the approaches of different international HPN-centers in their provision of HPN and the types of intravenous supplementation (IVS)-admixtures prescribed to patients with chronic intestinal failure (CIF). Methods: In March 2015, 65 centers from 22 countries enrolled 3239 patients (benign disease 90.1%, malignant disease 9.9%), recording the patient, CIF and HPN characteristics in a structured database. The HPN-provider was categorized as health care system local pharmacy (LP) or independent home care company (HCC). The IVS-admixture was categorized as fluids and electrolytes alone (FE) or parenteral nutrition, either commercially premixed (PA) or customized to the individual patient (CA), alone or plus extra FE (PAFE or CAFE). Doctors of HPN centers were responsible for the IVS prescriptions. Results: HCC (66%) was the most common HPN provider, with no difference noted between benign-CIF and malignant-CIF. LP was the main modality in 11 countries; HCC prevailed in 4 European countries: Israel, USA, South America and Oceania (p < 0.001). IVS-admixture comprised: FE 10%, PA 17%, PAFE 17%, CA 38%, CAFE 18%. PA and PAFE prevailed in malignant-CIF while CA and CAFE use was greater in benign-CIF (p < 0.001). PA + PAFE prevailed in those countries where LP was the main HPN-provider and CA + CAFE prevailed where the main HPN-provider was HCC (p < 0.001). Conclusions: This is the first study to demonstrate that HPN provision and the IVS-admixture differ greatly among countries, among HPN centers and between benign-CIF and cancer-CIF. As both HPN provider and IVS-admixture types may play a role in the safety and effectiveness of HPN therapy, criteria to homogenize HPN programs are needed so that patients can have equal access to optimal CIF care

Clinical classification of adult patients with chronic intestinal failure due to benign disease: An international multicenter cross-sectional survey.

BACKGROUND & AIMS The aim of the study was to evaluate the applicability of the ESPEN 16-category clinical classification of chronic intestinal failure, based on patients' intravenous supplementation (IVS) requirements for energy and fluids, and to evaluate factors associated with those requirements. METHODS ESPEN members were invited to participate through ESPEN Council representatives. Participating centers enrolled adult patients requiring home parenteral nutrition for chronic intestinal failure on March 1st 2015. The following patient data were recorded though a structured database: sex, age, body weight and height, intestinal failure mechanism, underlying disease, IVS volume and energy need. RESULTS Sixty-five centers from 22 countries enrolled 2919 patients with benign disease. One half of the patients were distributed in 3 categories of the ESPEN clinical classification. 9% of patients required only fluid and electrolyte supplementation. IVS requirement varied considerably according to the pathophysiological mechanism of intestinal failure. Notably, IVS volume requirement represented loss of intestinal function better than IVS energy requirement. A simplified 8 category classification of chronic intestinal failure was devised, based on two types of IVS (either fluid and electrolyte alone or parenteral nutrition admixture containing energy) and four categories of volume. CONCLUSIONS Patients' IVS requirements varied widely, supporting the need for a tool to homogenize patient categorization. This study has devised a novel, simplified eight category IVS classification for chronic intestinal failure that will prove useful in both the clinical and research setting when applied together with the underlying pathophysiological mechanism of the patient's intestinal failure