Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-r6qrq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T04:15:40.087Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Postoperative Artificial Nutrition: Overuse or Misuse?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 March 2009

Cyrille Colin ,
Denise Lanoir ,
Cecile Chambrier ,
Joan Wilkinson ,
Klim McPherson  and
Paul Bouletreau
Cyrille Colin
Affiliation:
University Claude Bernard Lyon I
Denise Lanoir
Affiliation:
University Claude Bernard Lyon I
Cecile Chambrier
Affiliation:
Hôtel-Dieu, Hospices Civils de Lyon
Joan Wilkinson
Affiliation:
London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine
Klim McPherson
Affiliation:
London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine
Paul Bouletreau
Affiliation:
Hôtel-Dieu, Hospices Civils de Lyon
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The practice of postoperative artificial nutrition (PAN) in elective surgery was covered by a consensus conference in France (December 16,1994). Artificial nutrition was defined as the intake of at least two macronutrients (protein, lipid, and carbohydrate) through an artificial pathway (enteral/parenteral). The guidelines resulting from the conference (2) recommended prescribing artificial nutrition for only malnourished patients, patients with insufficient postoperative nutrient intake lasting 7 or more days, and patients with severe postoperative complications. These were similar to American guidelines produced in 1993 (1).

Type
Research Notes
Information
International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care , Volume 13 , Issue 3 , Spring 1997 , pp. 471 - 472
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1997

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1.Board of Directors, American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition. Guidelines for the use of parenteral and enteral nutrition in adult and pediatric patients. Journal of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition, 1993, 17 (suppl. 1), 1–52.Google Scholar
2.Conférence de Consensus: Nutrition artificielle périopératoire en chirurgie programmée de l'adulte. Annales Françaises d'Anesthesie et de Réanimation, 1995, 14 (suppl. 2), 1–35.Google Scholar
3.McPherson, K. How should health policy be modified by the evidence of medical practice variations? In Marinker, M. (ed.), Controversies in health care policies 1994: Challenges to practice. British Medical Journal Publications.Google Scholar
4.Meijerink, W., Von Meyenfeldt, M., Rouflart, M, & Soeters, P.Efficacy of perioperative nutritional support. Lancet, 1992, 18, 187–88.Google Scholar
5.Veterans Affairs Total Parenteral Nutrition Cooperative Study Group. Perioperative total parenteral nutrition in surgical patients. New England Journal of Medicine, 1991, 325, 525–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6.Von Meyenfeldt, M., Meijerink, W., Rouflart, M., Builmaassen, M., & Soeters, P.Perioperative nutritional support: A randomized clinical trial. Journal of American Clinical Nutrition, 1992, 11, 180–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar