Cited by 345Clinical Nutrition and GastroenterologyInfant Nutrition and HealthAnimal Nutrition and Physiology

The Effect of Parenteral Nutrition on Gastrointestinal Immunity: The Importance of Enteral Stimulation

Open access
ALVERDY, JOHN, CHI, HOON SANG, SHELDON, GEORGE F.·1985·Annals of Surgery

Abstract

Secretory IgA (S-IgA), an immunoglobulin present in secretions, prevents the adherence of bacteria to mucosal cells and is the principle component of the gut mucosal defense system. The purpose of this study was to determine whether the route of nutrient administration affects S-IgA. Twenty-five female Fisher rats were randomized into three groups. Groups I and II were fed an isonitrogenous, isocaloric standard hyperalimentation solution, Group I intravenously and Group II via a gastrostomy. Group III (control) was fed rat chow and water ad lib. Since bile is one of the principle sources of S-IgA, animals had biliary T-tubes placed for sampling of bile every 4 days. At day 16, Group I animals were fed rat chow and water for an additional 8 days. S-IgA was measured by the ELISA immunoassay. Results indicated at day 16 that the S-IgA level in mg/ml of Group I was 1.1 +/- 0.2, while the S-IgA in Groups II and III was 2.2 +/- 0.6 and 2.2 +/- 0.26, respectively. Furthermore, the S-IgA level in Group I after 8 days of enteral feeding rose to 1.8 +/- 0.4. The difference in S-IgA levels between enterally and parenterally fed rats suggests that an important defense barrier is compromised during parenteral hyperalimentation. Rats fed the same nutrients by gastrostomy maintained S-IgA levels better than rats fed the same nutrients intravenously. The rapid return to normal levels after resumption of enteral feeding suggests that the intraluminal presence of foodstuffs is essential for maintenance of S-IgA.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/00000658-198512000-00003

Cites

13 of 13 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Almost every common clinical intervention used in intensive care changes environmental growth conditions for intestinal bacteria.

    “Almost every common clinical intervention used in intensive care (eg, enteral feeding,43 proton-pump inhibitors,38,39 systemic catecholamines,22,23 and systemic antibiotics65,66) changes environmental growth conditions for intestinal bacteria”

    From The microbiome and critical illness (2016) · cites this paper as [43]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
ALVERDY, J., CHI, H. S., & SHELDON, G. F.
Affiliations
San Francisco General Hospital (US)
Venue
Annals of Surgery
Published
1985-12
Volume
202
Issue
6
Pages
681-684
ISSN
0003-4932 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2035142804
Cited by
345
References
13
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 7
FWCI
2.16
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Annals of Surgery (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Clinical Nutrition and Gastroenterology
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Infant Nutrition and Health
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Animal Science and Zoology › Animal Nutrition and Physiology
Keywords
secretory IgA, parenteral nutrition, enteral nutrition, intestinal immunity, hyperalimentation, bile, gastrostomy
MeSH terms
Animals, Bile, Digestive System, Enteral Nutrition, Female, Gastric Mucosa, Immunoglobulin A, Secretory, Intestinal Mucosa, Parenteral Nutrition, Total, Random Allocation, Rats, Inbred Strains, Rats

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