Parenteral nutrition via peripheral veins: a feasibility study

Transdermal Glyceryl Trinitrate to Allow Peripheral Total Parenteral Nutrition: A Double-Blind Placebo Controlled Feasibility Study

Seventy-two consecutive patients requiring total parenteral nutrition (TPN) were randomized to two groups. Group A received daily a peripheral intravenous regimen which provided 10 g nitrogen and 1400 non-nitrogen kcal (5.9 MJ). Group B received daily a peripheral intravenous regimen which delivered 9.4 g nitrogen and 1900 non-nitrogen kcal (8.0 MJ). Each group was further randomized to receive a self-adhesive patch of transdermal glyceryl trinitrate (GTN) or an identical placebo. Infusion survival was the main end-point. For group A, the median time of infusion survival was 74 h (range: 58–100) in the control group compared with 108 h (range: 68–156) in the group that received transdermal GTN (P < 0.001). For group B, the median infusion survival was 67 h (range: 46–92) in the control group compared with 103 h (range: 66–151) in the treatment group (P < 0.001). TPN is feasible via peripheral veins and the incidence of infusion failure can be effectively reduced by transdermal GTN.

The local vascular tolerance to an intravenous infusion of a concentrated glutamine solution in ICU patients

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The beneficial effects of glutamine is well-documented in ICU patients. However, the documentation and control of enteral administration of glutamine is still insufficient. As an adjunct to enteral nutrition, a concentrated dipeptide solution may be given in a central venous line, but administration via a peripheral vein would be preferable. Therefore, we systematically evaluated local vascular tolerance following a concentrated dipeptide infusion in ICU-patients.

METHODS

ICU-patients (n=20) were randomized to receive a 20% alanyl-glutamine infusion of 0.5 g/kg or placebo during 4 h in a peripheral vein on 3 consecutive days. Local tolerance was evaluated clinically, by Maddox score, and ultrasonically before the infusion and on days 1, 4 and 8 after the infusion.

RESULTS

In the study, 56 out of 60 (93%) planned infusions were administered and 157 out of 168 (93%) clinical evaluations were successfully performed. The ultrasonic evaluation revealed that the utilized veins had a diameter of 2.15+/-0.8 mm (range, 1.0--4.4 mm). There were no signs of thrombophlebitis in any single vein.

CONCLUSION

Administration of a glutamine-containing dipeptide concentrate (20%) by peripheral veins is safe in terms of local tolerance, if a strict protocol is adapted for this purpose is used.

Do heparin, hydrocortisone, and glyceryl trinitrate influence thrombophlebitis during full intravenous nutrition via a peripheral vein?

The aim of this prospective, randomized study was to determine if the addition of heparin and hydrocortisone, and the application of a topical glyceryl trinitrate patch over the catheter site (triple therapy) would results in a reduced incidence of thrombophlebitis during i.v. nutrition through a peripheral vein. Forty-six patients were randomized to receive either standard i.v. nutrition (i.v.N)(1200 mosm/kg) (control group, n = 23), or i.v.N plus triple therapy (study group, n = 23). The patient's arm was examined daily, and the catheter was removed if signs of thrombophlebitis were evident. The two groups were well matched in terms of age and gender, as well as indication for feeding and total days of i.v.N supplied. The catheters in the study group survived longer (p < .0001), and resulted in a lower incidence of thrombophlebitis (p < .05). The time of onset of thrombophlebitis was delayed in the study group (p < .0001). It is recommended that heparin, hydrocortisone, and a glyceryl trinitrate patch should be administered to all patients receiving i.v. nutrition via a fine-bore peripheral catheter.

First choice for total parenteral nutrition: the peripheral route

Historically, total parenteral nutrition (TPN) has been administered by the central venous route because of the rapid development of thrombophlebitis when TPN solutions are administered into peripheral veins. The insertion and placement of central venous catheters is, however, associated with morbidity and mortality and is the main cause of TPN-related complications. By avoiding central venous catheterization, TPN can be made safer. Current awareness about the pathophysiology of peripheral vein thrombophlebitis and the use of a number of techniques that prevent or delay onset of peripheral vein thrombophlebitis mean it is now possible to administer TPN via the peripheral route. These techniques and changes in the practice of TPN in recent years (eg, reduction of caloric loads and use of lipid emulsions) mean peripheral parenteral nutrition is a technique that is now applicable to the majority of hospitalized, nutritionally compromised patients for whom intravenous feeding is anticipated for less than 10 to 14 days.

Total parenteral nutrition by peripheral vein — Substitute or supplement to the central venous route? A prospective trial

51 consecutive gastroenterological patients who required total parenteral nutrition (TPN) were entered into this study. Two patients were withdrawn because of specific nutritional requirements, leaving 49 patients for randomisation. 23 patients were allocated to receive peripheral parenteral nutrition (PPN) and 26 to receive feeding through a central venous line (CPN). There was no significant difference between the groups with respect to the median duration of feeding (9.4 +/- 3.6 days; 12.0 +/- 7.8 days) but significant morbidity occurred more frequently in the CPN group (11%) compared to the PPN group (0%). TPN by the designated route was not possible in 4 patients in the PPN group and in 3 of the CPN group. Of the 19 patients commenced on PPN, 13 continued without complication until resumption of oral feeding (median 10.7 +/- 3.2 days); 6 of these patients had to be converted to central venous feeding for completion of their nutritional requirements. Of the 23 patients commenced on CPN, 21 completed their nutritional course (median 11.8 +/- 5.3 days), 2 patients in the CPN group required conversion to PPN to complete their nutritional course. This study shows that PPN is a feasible, safe alternative to CPN in many patients. It is not necessary to subject all patients who require TPN to the risks and expense of central venous cannulation.

Total peripheral parenteral nutrition in pregnancy

Twenty pregnant patients needing nutritional support for various indications received hypercaloric, hyperosmotic, "3 in 1," peripheral parenteral nutrition as a bridge to enteral therapy. This system, named total peripheral parenteral nutrition, was evaluated as to tolerance and efficacy in pregnant patients. Patients were in various stages of pregnancy and had an average weight loss of 10.4 pounds prior to admission. Patients were maintained on total peripheral parenteral nutrition for an average of 5 days and gained an average of 4.1 pounds. Good tolerance with minimal side effects of the treatment was noted. Intravenous sites were changed an average of 1.1 times per patient during the course of therapy and only one serious complication was noted in 20 patients. Patients were followed through delivery and this information is presented. Total peripheral parenteral nutrition appears to be an acceptable alternative to conventional total parenteral nutrition to pregnant patients needing nutritional support. These hypertonic solutions can supply total caloric/metabolic needs without unacceptable side effects.