| Literature DB >> 25793189 |
John K Triantafillidis1, Costas Vagianos2, Apostolos E Papalois3.
Abstract
Enteral nutrition (EN) is considered to be of great importance in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) and nutritional problems. This comprehensive review is aiming to provide the reader with an update on the role of EN in IBD patients. EN can reduce Crohn's disease (CD) activity and maintain remission in both adults and children. Nutritional support using liquid formulas should be considered for CD patients and in serious cases of ulcerative colitis (UC), especially for those who may require prolonged cycles of corticosteroids. Given that the ultimate goal in the treatment of CD is mucosal healing, this advantage of EN over corticosteroid treatment is valuable in therapeutic decision-making. EN is indicated in active CD, in cases of steroid intolerance, in patient's refusal of steroids, in combination with steroids in undernourished individuals, and in patients with an inflammatory stenosis of the small intestine. No differences between the efficiency of elemental diets and nonelemental formulas have been noticed. EN must be the first choice compared to TPN. EN has a restricted value in the treatment of patients with large bowel CD. In conclusion, it seems important not to underestimate the role of nutrition as supportive care in patients with IBD.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 25793189 PMCID: PMC4352452 DOI: 10.1155/2015/197167
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomed Res Int Impact factor: 3.411
Causes of malnutrition in patients with IBD [7–9, 11–14].
| Decrease in oral intake | (i) Restrictive diets |
|
| |
| Gastrointestinal losses | (i) Diarrhea |
|
| |
| Metabolic disorders | (i) Increase in resting energy expenditure due to inflammation, fever, and sepsis |
|
| |
| Increase in nutritional requirements | (i) Inflammatory states [ |
|
| |
| Drug interaction | (i) Corticosteroids and calcium reabsorption |
|
| |
| Poor absorption of nutrients | (i) Reduction of the absorptive surface due to intestinal resection and enteric fistulas [ |
Mechanisms of action of enteral nutrition in patients with IBD [15–18].
| Sequestration of intraluminal antigens | |
| Modulation of the immune response of the bowel [ | |
| Downregulation of proinflammatory cytokines | |
| Restore of the antioxidant status | |
| Anti-inflammatory effects [ | |
| Alteration in the uptake of polyunsaturated fatty acids (n-6/n-3 fatty acids) [ | |
| Enhancement of the restoration/function of the intestinal mucosal barrier (intestinal permeability) [ | |
| Regulation of the intestinal microflora | |
| Regulation of the intestinal motility | |
| Promotion of epithelial healing | |
| Regulation of the bile-pancreatic secretions | |
| Sequestration of nutritional particles | |
| Improvement of nutritional status [ | |
| Amelioration of the mesenteric adipose tissue hypertrophy [ |
Enteral nutrition (elemental and polymeric diet) on induction of remission in patients with Crohn's disease.
| Author/reference | Number of patients | Diets compared | Outcomes/measurements | Results | Conclusion |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Greenberg et al. [ | 51 | TPN versus formula diet via NG versus partial parenteral and oral food | Relapse rates, weight, albumin, arm circumference, and triceps skinfold thickness | Clinical remission in 71% of parenteral group, 60% of partial parenteral group, and 58% defined formula group | In patients with active CD bowel rest is not a major factor in achieving a remission during nutritional support and did not influence outcome during one-year follow-up |
|
| |||||
| Jones [ | 36 | TPN versus elemental for induction of remission in CD | CDAI, ESR, and serum albumin | Both were successful with no significant differences. | The use of EN followed by a personal food exclusion diet is an effective long-term therapeutic strategy for CD |
|
| |||||
| Esaki et al. [ | 145 | Enteral nutrition versus nonenteral (elemental or polymeric) nutrition | Rate of relapse based on CDAI scores | The rate of recurrence was higher in the nonenteral nutrition group than in the EN group | Among patients with CD under maintenance EN, the risk of recurrence differs according to the disease type and location. EN alone is insufficient for patients with penetrating type or with colonic involvement |
Prospective studies of enteral nutrition as maintenance therapy.
| Author/reference | Enteral versus control ( | Study characteristics | Duration of treatment (months) | Results (rate of recurrence) | Conclusion |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yamamoto et al. [ | 20/20 | Prospective CD remission elemental overnight | 12 | 5/20 versus 13/20 | EN therapy reduces the incidence of postoperative CD recurrence |
|
| |||||
| Yamamoto et al. [ | 20/20 | Prospective postoperative elemental overnight | 12 | 1/20 versus 7/20 | Long-term EN in patients with quiescent CD improves clinical and endoscopic disease activities and the mucosal inflammatory cytokine levels |
|
| |||||
| Takagi et al. [ | 26 (elemental diet group) | Prospective CD remission elemental diet | 24 | 35% versus 64% | A half elemental diet is a promising maintenance therapy for CD |
|
| |||||
| Esaki et al. [ | 21/18 | Prospective postoperative 1200 kcal/day versus 1200 kcal/day enteral | 6–83 | 11/24 versus 12/16 | EN could prevent the postoperative recurrence of terminal ileum CD. Patients with the penetrating type and those who do not have active lesions in the terminal ileum could receive EN after surgery |
|
| |||||
| Verma et al. [ | 21 on EN in addition to normal diet versus 18 pts on normal, unrestricted diet | Prospective CD remission oral nutritional supplements | 12 | On an intention-to-treat basis, 10/21 (48%) remained in remission compared to 4/18 (22%) patients in Group 2, ( | Nutritional supplementation is safe, well tolerated, and effective in the long-term management of patients with quiescent CD |
|
| |||||
| Harries et al. [ | 28 malnourished patients with CD | Prospective crossover for 2 months oral nutritional supplements | 4 | Disease activity, nutritional status | Enteral supplementation can be managed successfully at home and may improve nutrition and disease activity |
| Author/reference | Total number of patients | Treatment's duration | Short-term remission | Long-term remission | Conclusion | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Non-ED (rate of remission) | ED (rate of remission) | Non-ED (rate of remission) | ED (rate of remission) | ||||
| Rigaud et al. [ | 30 | 6 weeks (short-term) | 11/15 (73%) | 10/15 (67%) | 4/15 (27%) | 3/15 (2%) | EN (non-ED or ED) is an efficient therapy for active CD. EN does not influence the long term outcome |
|
| |||||||
| Verma et al. [ | 21 | 6 weeks | 6/11 (55%) | 8/10 (80%) | — | — | EN is effective in treatment of active CD Polymeric and elemental diets are equally effective |
|
| |||||||
| Giaffer et al. [ | 30 | 4 weeks | 5/14 (36%) | 12/16 (75%) | — | — | ED offers significantly better short-term results compared to polymeric (non-elemental) diet in patients with acute exacerbations of CD |
Non-ED = non-elemental diet, ED = elemental diet.
| Author/reference | Total patients' number | Treatment's duration | Short-term remission | Long-term remission | Conclusion | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Steroids (remission rate) | Enteral (*) nutrition (remission rate) | Steroids (remission rate) | Enteral (*) nutrition (remission rate) | ||||
| Morain et al. [ | 21 | 4 weeks (short-term) and 12 weeks (long-term) | 8/10 (80%) | 9/11 (82%) | 7/10 (70%) | 8/11 (73%) | EN is effective as CSs in inducing remission |
|
| |||||||
| Malchow et al. [ | 95 | 6 weeks | 32/44 (73%) | 21/51 (41%) | — | — | Drug combination was superior to EN in short-term remission |
|
| |||||||
| Lochs et al. [ | 107 | 6 weeks | 41/52 (79%) | 29/55 (53%) | — | — | EN is less effective than a combination of CSs and sulfasalazine in short-term remission |
|
| |||||||
| Gorard et al. [ | 33 | 12 weeks | 17/20 (85%) | 10/13 (77%) | 6/19 (32%) | 1/11 (9%) | EN is equally effective in the short term as CSs in CD The relapse rate after EN was greater than after treatment with CSs |
|
| |||||||
| Gonzalez-Huix et al. [ | 32 | 4 weeks (short-term) | 15/17 (88%) | 12/15 (81%) | 7/17 (41%) | 10/15 (67%) | EN is as safe and effective as CSs in inducing short-term remission in active CD |
|
| |||||||
| Lindor et al. [ | 19 | 4 weeks | 7/10 (70%) | 3/9 (33%) | — | — | The often poorly tolerated EN should not be considered as a substitute for standard therapy with CSs in CD |
*Enteral nutrition (elemental or polymeric).