Adult Home Parenteral Nutrition: a clinical evaluation after a 3-year experience in a Southern European centre
Abstract
Aim To evaluate the current use of Home Parenteral Nutrition (HPN) in a Southern European region. Subjects and methods A total of 159 (86 m, 73 f) HPN patients, mean age 60.1 +/- 14.2 years, BMI 18.8 +/- 3.3kg/m2, consecutively referred to the Artificial Nutrition outpatient Unit of the Federico II University Hospital in Naples (Italy), from January 2000 to December 2002 and treated for at least 4 weeks. Retrospective evaluation of baseline disease, indications and duration of HPN treatment, type of venous access, complications. Results In all, 140 (88%) were cancer and 19 (12%) noncancer patients. Main indications were carcinosis in 68 for total, and hypophagia/dysphagia in 62 patients for partial/integrative (to oral-enteral nutrition) HPN; mean duration of HPN was 81.45 +/- 110.86 days of treatment and infection rate 2.89% in the whole population and 2.66% in the 36 patients treated for more than 3 months. No other major complications have been observed. Conclusion HPN is confirmed to be a safe and effective treatment when prescribed and administered by a trained team.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Several studies have documented that parenteral nutrition is a feasible and successful method of nutritional support also in older people, not only in the hospital but also at home.
“Several studies have documented that PN is a feasible and successful method of nutritional support also in older people (130,(178)(179)(180), not only in the hospital but also at home (181).”
From ESPEN practical guideline: Clinical nutrition and hydration in geriatrics (2022) · cites this paper as [181]
Cited by
Sorted by citations
ESPEN practical guideline: Clinical nutrition and hydration in geriatrics
Volkert, D., Beck, A. M., Cederholm, T., Cruz-Jentoft, A., Hooper, L., Kiesswetter, E., Maggio, M., Raynaud-Simon, A., Sieber, C., Sobotka, L., et al. (2022) · Clinical Nutrition · doi:10.1016/j.clnu.2022.01.024 · Cited by 516 · see citing works
- Authors
- Violante, G., Alfonsi, L., Santarpia, L., Cillis, M. C., Negro, G., De Caprio, C., Russo, N., Contaldo, F., & Pasanisi, F.
- Affiliations
- Federico II University Hospital (IT)
- Corresponding author
- Santarpia, L
- Venue
- European Journal of Clinical Nutrition
- Published
- 2005-08-31
- Volume
- 60
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 58-61
- ISSN
- 0954-3007 (ISSN-L)
- 1476-5640
- OpenAlex
- W1994982114
- Cited by
- 33
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 2
- FWCI
- 2.74
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- European Journal of Clinical Nutrition (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Clinical Nutrition and Gastroenterology
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Emergency Medical Services › Central Venous Catheters and Hemodialysis
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Nutrition and Health in Aging
- Keywords
- home parenteral nutrition, adult patients, cancer patients, hypophagia, dysphagia, infection rate, complications, venous access, treatment duration, nutritional support
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Female, Humans, Infections, Italy, Male, Middle Aged, Neoplasms, Palliative Care, Patient Care Team, Registries, Retrospective Studies, Time Factors, Parenteral Nutrition, Home, Treatment Outcome
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
