Sara L Bonnes1, Kerstin E Austin2, Jennifer J Carnell3, Bradley R Salonen3. 1. Division of General Internal Medicine, Mayo Clinic, 200 First Street SW, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA. bonnes.sara@mayo.edu. 2. Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of Wisconsin, UW MED FNDTN Centennial BLDG, 1685 Highland AVE, Madison, WI, 53705-2281, USA. 3. Division of General Internal Medicine, Mayo Clinic, 200 First Street SW, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Drug shortages continue to impact our patients with intestinal failure and their ability to receive nutrition. ASPEN guidelines address the management of certain shortages in compounded total parenteral nutrition (TPN); however, some institutions have utilized premixed total parenteral nutrition (pTPN) in place of TPN. RECENT FINDINGS: Premixed TPN appears to be as safe, if not safer, as compounded TPN when comparing the risk of bloodstream infection. However, there is an increased use of supplemental electrolytes to meet patient needs. Cost-effectiveness depends on multiple factors and should be evaluated by each institution when considering the use of TPN. In light of the published information on the use of pTPN compared to TPN, institutions and nutrition clinicians should consider their current practice and opportunities to consider when pTPN may be beneficial for their patients, not only from a safety perspective, but also considering cost savings. However, close monitoring and individual patient needs should be considered as these formulas may not meet all patient nutritional and electrolyte needs.
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Drug shortages continue to impact our patients with intestinal failure and their ability to receive nutrition. ASPEN guidelines address the management of certain shortages in compounded total parenteral nutrition (TPN); however, some institutions have utilized premixed total parenteral nutrition (pTPN) in place of TPN. RECENT FINDINGS: Premixed TPN appears to be as safe, if not safer, as compounded TPN when comparing the risk of bloodstream infection. However, there is an increased use of supplemental electrolytes to meet patient needs. Cost-effectiveness depends on multiple factors and should be evaluated by each institution when considering the use of TPN. In light of the published information on the use of pTPN compared to TPN, institutions and nutrition clinicians should consider their current practice and opportunities to consider when pTPN may be beneficial for their patients, not only from a safety perspective, but also considering cost savings. However, close monitoring and individual patient needs should be considered as these formulas may not meet all patient nutritional and electrolyte needs.
Authors: Michael A Storey; Robert J Weber; Kelly Besco; Stuart Beatty; Kumiko Aizawa; Jay M Mirtallo Journal: Nutr Clin Pract Date: 2015-10-27 Impact factor: 3.080
Authors: Steve Plogsted; Stephen C Adams; Karen Allen; M Petrea Cober; June Greaves; Amy Ralph; Daniel T Robinson; Kim Sabino; Renee Walker; Ceressa T Ward; Joe Ybarra; Beverly Holcombe Journal: Nutr Clin Pract Date: 2017-03-15 Impact factor: 3.080
Authors: Steve Plogsted; Stephen C Adams; Karen Allen; M Petrea Cober; June Greaves; Kris M Mogensen; Amy Ralph; Ceressa Ward; Joe Ybarra; Beverly Holcombe Journal: Nutr Clin Pract Date: 2016-06-13 Impact factor: 3.080
Authors: Steve Plogsted; Stephen C Adams; Karen Allen; M Petrea Cober; June Greaves; Kris M Mogensen; Amy Ralph; Ceressa Ward; Joe Ybarra; Beverly Holcombe Journal: Nutr Clin Pract Date: 2016-05-17 Impact factor: 3.080