| Literature DB >> 26642931 |
Camila Ortiz Prospero Cavalcante Costa1, Flair José Carrilho2, Valeria Sutti Nunes3, Aytan Miranda Sipahi4, Maraci Rodrigues5.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The relationship between nutrition and Crohn's disease (CD) is complex and involves several therapeutic possibilities including: nutrition treatment for malnourished patients, optimization of growth and development, prevention of osteoporosis, first-line therapy for active disease, and maintenance of disease remission. In children and adolescents with CD, malnutrition is a common problem that adversely affects the prognosis. In at-risk adolescent CD patients, it is important to assess body composition, food intake, energy expenditure, nutrient balance and serum levels of nutrients before planning interventions for this population. The aim of this study was to provide a snapshot of the nutritional status of adolescents with CD in Brazil.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26642931 PMCID: PMC4672540 DOI: 10.1186/s12876-015-0403-2
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Gastroenterol ISSN: 1471-230X Impact factor: 3.067
Sociodemographic characteristics of Crohn’s disease patients and controls
| Characteristic | Active CD (Group I) | Inactive CD (Group II) | Control (Group III) | G1 | G2 | G3 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ( | ( | ( | |||||
| Age (years), mean ± SD | 16.4 ± 2.5 | 17.3 ± 2.19 | 15.5 ± 2.31 | NS | NS | NS | |
| Gender | |||||||
| Male, n (%) | 12 (54.5) | 16 (55.2) | 22 (62.8) | NS | NS | NS | |
| Female, | 10 (45.5) | 13 (44.8) | 13 (37.2) | NS | NS | NS | |
| Race | |||||||
| White, | 20 (90.9) | 26 (89.6) | 32 (91.3) | NS | NS | NS | |
| Non-White, | 2 (9.1) | 3 (10.4) | 3 (8.7) | NS | NS | NS |
CD Crohn’s disease, SD: standard deviation, G1 group I vs. group II, G2 group I vs. group III, G3 group II vs. group III, NS not significant
Clinical characteristics, location, and behavior of the disease in patients with active and inactive Crohn’s disease, based on Levine et al. [8]
| Active CD | Inactive CD | G1 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mean time of disease duration (years) ± SD | 1.14 ± 1.06 | 2.83 ± 3.34 | NS |
| Mean age of onset of symptoms (years) ± SD | 14.4 ± 3.7 | 14.1 ± 3.7 | NS |
| Mean age at diagnosis (years) ± SD | 15.6 ± 2.38 | 14.5 ± 3.66 | NS |
| Mean PCDAI ± SD | 18.3 ± 10.8 26.2 ± 11.4 | 7.0 ± 7.1 | |
| Location, | |||
| L1(distal 1/3 ileum/limited cecal disease) | 8 (36) | 11 (38) | NS |
| L2(colonic) | 3 (14) | 7 (24) | NS |
| L3(ileocolonic) | 11 (50) | 11 (38) | NS |
| L4 a (upper disease proximal to ligament of Treitz) | 0 | 0 | |
| L4b (upper disease distal to ligament of Treitz and proximal to distal 1/3 ileum | 0 | 0 | |
| Behavior, | |||
| B1: non-stricturing non-penetrating | 16 (73) | 25 (86) | NS |
| B2: structuring | 2 (9) | 0 | NS |
| B3: penetrating | 4 (18) | 4 (14) | NS |
| B2B3: both penetrating and stricturing disease, either at the same or different times | 0 | 0 | |
| p: perianal disease modifier | 2 (9) | 0 | NS |
CD Crohn’s disease, SD standard deviation, G1 group I vs. group II
Anthropometric evaluation of active and inactive Crohn’s disease patients and controls
| Variable | Active CD | Inactive CD | Control | G1 | G2 | G3 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (Group I) | (Group II) | (Group III) | ||||
| ( | ( | ( | ||||
| Z score | ||||||
| Ha, mean ± SD | −0.41 ± 0.90 | −0.15 ± 0.92 | 0.24 ± 0.99 | * | * | * |
| BMIa, mean ± SD | −1.29 ± 1.64 | 0.01 ± 1.18 | 0.37 ± 1.18 | * | * | * |
| Bioimpedance analysis | ||||||
| BF (%), mean ± SD | 23 ± 0.08 | 21 ± 0.05 | 24 ± 0.04 | NS | NS | NS |
| LBM (%), mean ± SD | 74 ± 0.08 | 79 ± 0.05 | 76 ± 0.04 | * | * | NS |
| Tanner staging | ||||||
| Delayed puberty, n (%) | 5 (22.7) | 2 (6.9) | - | * | * | NS |
CD Crohn’s disease, G1 group I vs. group II, G2 group I vs. group III, G3 group II vs. group III, Ha height-for-age, BMIa body mass index-for-age, BF body fat, LBM lean body mass, NS not significant; *p < 0.05
Distribution of the patients (%) with active or inactive Crohn’s disease according to the drugs that were taken before and during the study
| Drug | Before the study | G1 | During the study | G1 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Active CD | Inactive CD | Active CD | Inactive CD | |||
| (Group I) | (Group II) | (Group I) | (Group II) | |||
| Azathioprine | 22(100) | 25(86.2) | NS | 21(95.4) | 18(62.1) | * |
| Sulfasalazine | 3(13.6) | 3(10.3) | NS | 2(9.1) | 1(3.5) | NS |
| Mesalazine | 20(90.9) | 15(51.7) | * | 10(45.4) | 16(55.2) | NS |
| Ciprofloxacin | 12(54.5) | 16(55.2) | NS | 3(13.6) | 12(41) | * |
| Metronidazole | 10(45.4) | 11(37.9) | NS | 4(18.2) | 2(6.9) | NS |
| Infliximab | 8(36.3) | 6(20.7) | NS | 5(23.1) | 5(17.2) | NS |
CD Crohn’s disease, G1 group I vs. group II, NS not significant; *p < 0.05
Fig. 1Deficiencya in the ingestion of total calories, macronutrients and fiber in patients with active DC, patients with inactive DC and control individuals. a Percentange of deficiency is based on the recommendations of the World Health Organization and the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization [17]. *p < 0.05 vs. inactive CD group; # p < 0.05 vs. control group
Fig. 2Percentage of deficiencya in mineral intake in the patients with active DC, patients with inactive DC and control individuals. aPercentange of deficiency is based on dietary reference intakes [16]. *p < 0.05 vs. inactive CD group; # p < 0.05 vs. control group
Fig. 3Percentage of deficiencya in vitamin intake in the patients with active DC, patients with inactive DC and control individuals. aPercentage of deficiency is based on dietary reference intakes [16]. *p < 0.05 vs. inactive CD group; # p < 0.05 vs. control group
Fig. 4Percentage of serum mineral deficiency in the patients with active DC, patients with inactive DC and control individuals
Fig. 5Percentage of serum vitamin deficiency in the patients with activity CD, inactive CD and control group. *p < 0.05 vs. inactive CD group; # p < 0.05 vs. control group