Elfadil, Osman Mohamed

AbstractBackgroundGastrostomy tubes placed radiologically, endoscopically or surgically facilitate long‐term home enteral nutrition (HEN). Patient‐specific clinical factors may affect placement techniques, confounding direct comparisons between radiologically inserted gastrostomy (RIG) and percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) outcomes. This study sought to evaluate the differences in clinical outcomes in patients undergoing gastrostomy tube placement by interventional radiologists or gastroenterologists.MethodsA single‐center prospective trial randomizing patients initiating HEN to RIG or PEG was conducted between March 2018 and June 2021. Patients were followed until the time of gastrostomy removal or until 9 months after tube placement. Tracked complications included peritonitis, abscess, bleeding, bowel perforation, and tube occlusion, malposition, or damage. Periprocedural pain rating and quality of life (QoL) surveys were collected.ResultsForty‐two patients were randomized to RIG or PEG. Twenty patients underwent RIG (mean age, 63.0 ± 11.7 years; 85% male; 95% with head and neck cancer) and 22 patients underwent PEG (mean age, 66.3 ± 10.9 years; 81.8% male; 90.9% with head and neck cancer). RIG and PEG groups had 4.18 ± 5.49 and 2.80 ± 5.82 complications per 1000 HEN days, respectively (P = 0.357). The most frequent complications were tube malposition and abscess formation for the RIG and PEG groups, respectively. No major complications occurred in either group. There was no difference in the average of pain ratings in all pain inventory components across both groups. Both groups reported improvement in overall QoL after gastrostomy tube placement (P = 0.532).ConclusionRIG is noninferior to PEG regarding complication rates, pain, and QoL when compared in a prospective randomized fashion.

AbstractBackgroundMalnutrition is underrecognized and underdiagnosed, despite high prevalence rates and associated poor clinical outcomes. The involvement of clinical nutrition experts, especially physicians, in the care of high‐risk patients with malnutrition remains low despite evidence demonstrating lower complication rates with nutrition support team (NST) management. To facilitate solutions, a survey was designed to elucidate the nature of NSTs and physician involvement and identify needs for novel nutrition support care models.MethodsThis survey assessed demographics of NSTs, factors contributing to the success of NSTs, elements of nutrition education, and other barriers to professional growth.ResultsOf 255 respondents, 235 complete surveys were analyzed. The geographic distribution of respondents correlated with population concentrations of the United States (r = 90.8%, p < .0001). Most responding physicians (46/57; 80.7%) reported being a member of NSTs, compared with 56.5% (88/156) of dietitians. Of those not practicing in NSTs (N = 81/235, 34.4%), 12.3% (10/81) reported an NST was previously present at their institution but had been disbanded. Regarding NSTs, financial concerns were common (115/235; 48.9%), followed by leadership (72/235; 30.6%), and healthcare professional (HCP) interest (55/235; 23.4%). A majority (173/235; 73.6%) of all respondents wanted additional training in nutrition but reported insufficient protected time, ability to travel, or support from administrators or other HCPs.ConclusionCore actions resulting from this survey focused on formalizing physician roles, increasing interdisciplinary nutrition support expertise, utilizing cost‐effective screening for malnutrition, and implementing intervention protocols. Additional actions included increasing funding for clinical practice, education, and research, all within an expanded portfolio of pragmatic nutrition support care models.

AbstractAs the prevalence of smoking continues to decline, dietary factors are rapidly becoming the leading preventable cause of disease. Diet and obesity are also leading to a shift in cancer prevalence with increases noted in breast, liver, pancreas, and uterine cancers. Once cancer is detected, obesity is also associated with poorer outcomes with therapy as well as higher morbidity and mortality. Key factors are associated with the link between obesity and cancer including chronic inflammation, change in sex hormones, alteration in insulin‐IGF‐1 axis, alteration in adipokines, as well as cancer stem cells that are derived from adipose tissue. Because of these associations, a great deal of effort is being placed in implementing lifestyle changes that mitigate obesity‐associated factors that contribute to development of cancer, reduce side effects of treatment, and improve survival. Ketogenic diet is emerging as an attractive option in countering obesity‐related tumor‐promoting factors, as it is associated with weight loss as well as a reduction in insulin resistance and inflammation. Ketogenic diet can also deprive cancer cells of glucose, a fuel source that is predominantly used by many cancer lines through aerobic glycolysis in the setting of dysregulated mitochondria. Current manuscript reviews the theoretical benefits for use of ketogenic diet in cancer as well as the data available from clinical trials.

Abstract Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19), after initially being detected in Wuhan, China in late 2019, quickly spread to most regions of the world, meeting World Health Organization criteria for a pandemic. Social distancing along with other measures implemented to control spread had a drastic impact on the provision of healthcare including deferred elective procedures and surgeries as well as delayed care and evaluation for emergent diagnoses such as heart attacks and strokes. In the home nutrition practice, patients began to delay routine laboratory tests and were canceling or deferring annual visits. Our group soon began to rapidly deploy telehealth to meet the needs of the home nutrition patients. Telehealth is not a new concept with descriptions of healthcare being provided at a distance with the use of telephone in the 1870s. However, widespread adoption has been limited because of regulation (licensure, prescriptions, credentialing, and privileges), lack of reimbursement, as well as adoption and availability of technology needed to carry out telehealth visits. As regulations and limits on reimbursements were waived during COVID‐19 pandemic, our home nutrition practice began to evaluate core components of the care we provide for our patients and assess which could be successfully transitioned to telehealth. In addition to the history and regulation of telehealth, the current manuscript provides details regarding successful implementation of telehealth visits such as change management, selection of telehealth platform, scheduling and logistics, as well as carrying out the virtual visit including history and physical exam.

Purpose of review Home enteral nutrition (HEN) is a well-established practical nutrition therapy tool that is typically managed by an interdisciplinary team. Prevalence of HEN is increasing across the globe given significant evidence for utility, feasibility, efficacy, safety, and reliability of HEN in helping patients meeting their nutrition needs. The current review highlights the growing use of HEN in the context of what is novel in the field including trends in HEN practice with regards to tubes and connectors, feeding formula and real food blends, and common complications. The review also highlights that the use of HEN is expected to expand further over coming years emphasizing the need for national consensus recommendations and guidelines for HEN management. Recent findings The growing use of HEN has always been parallel to adoption of holistic definitions and concept of malnutrition in clinical nutrition practice and more understanding of the need for malnutrition risk stratification, meeting unmet needs in practice and addressing challenges that lead to suboptimal enteral nutrition. Summary Research and advancements in technology as well as in tube feeding formula industry have led to the development of more solutions and have helped identify and implement best HEN practices.

Abstract Background Home enteral nutrition (HEN) use continues to increase in children unable to meet nutritional needs through oral intake. Some patients do not tolerate standard polymeric formula (SPF), which may lead to malnutrition. Use of peptide‐based diet (PBD) has demonstrated benefits in adults, however there remains a paucity of data in pediatric population. Methods Retrospective review of medical records of children receiving HEN between October 2015 and October 2019 was conducted. Nutrition, tolerance, and healthcare utilization was tracked through May 2020. Children receiving PBD as initial formula or transitioned to PBD from SPF were included. Our objective was to assess gastrointestinal tolerance and impact on healthcare utilization in children receiving PBD. Results During study period, 30 children (mean age, 9 ± 5.44 years; 20 of 30 [66.7%] male) utilized PBDs. Twenty‐one patients started PBD directly with malnutrition as primary indication. Nine patients transitioned from SPF to PBD, most often due to intolerance of SPF (66%). After transition to PBD, no symptoms were reported in 6 of 9 (66.7%) patients, and symptoms of SPF intolerance resolved in 4 of 9 (44.5%) patients. Healthcare utilization declined significantly after transition to PBD, including mean numbers of emergency room visits (0.78 ± 1.09 to 0.11 ± 0.33; P = .025), provider visits (1.67 ± 1.32 to 0.56 ± 0.73; P = .007), and phone calls (1.22 ± 1.39 to 0.33 ± 0.50; P = .026). Conclusions PBD is well tolerated and can result in significant reduction in healthcare utilization in children intolerant to SPF.

AbstractEnteral nutrition (EN) is a widely used therapeutic tool to provide nutrition support for patients with various clinical conditions, including different types of cancer. Head and neck cancers, often complicated by dysphagia, are among leading indications for enteral feeding. Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) and percutaneous endoscopic jejunostomy (PEJ) tubes are typically used to deliver EN. This article presents a case report of a young male with squamous cell carcinoma of the tongue. Unfortunately, he developed metastasis of his cancer at the right lateral side of the PEG placement site, requiring surgical resection of seeded growth at the PEG site. This rare complication can be challenging, as it requires a high index of suspicion to diagnose and can potentially limit nutrition support options. A number of theories have been proposed to explain seeding during PEG/PEJ placement, including direct repositioning of malignant cells during instrumentation. A specific placement technique has not been shown to be superior, as seeding was reported with all placement techniques. However, given the lack of statistically powerful studies to describe this entity, there are still gaps we need to explore to better understand seeding of feeding tubes and best practices around diagnosis and early treatment. EN continues to be an important part of caring for patients with cancer during active or palliative treatments. Understanding potential risks in the setting of cancer metastasis is beneficial to the patients and multidisciplinary teams involved. Early recognition of possible seeding of feeding tube sites is necessary to ensure subsequent timely surgical intervention.

AbstractBackgroundBariatric surgery is by far the most effective treatment option available for successfully achieving and maintaining weight loss in the obese population, but it can also be associated with complications that lead to malnutrition. There is limited data on how enteral nutrition (EN) can be used to provide nutrition support in such cases.MethodsRetrospective review of our Home Enteral Nutrition (HEN) database was conducted from February 2013 to April 2018 to identify patients who received HEN because of bariatric surgery–related complication.ResultsDuring the study period, 72 patients (86% female, mean age 50.3 ± 11.6 years) initiated HEN because of bariatric surgical complication. Most common bariatric surgery was Roux‐en‐Y (74%) and most common indication for HEN was malnutrition/failure to thrive (33%). HEN was most commonly provided through nasojejunal feeds and resulted in an average increase in body weight and body mass index from 74.8 kg and 26.5, respectively, before HEN to 76.9 kg and 27.2, respectively, at the end of the HEN period. Through HEN, patients received 22.2 ± 7.9 kcal/kg/d and 1.0 ± 0.3 g/kg/d protein, meeting 94% ± 17% of their energy goals and 95% ± 29% of their protein goals. Vitamin deficiencies were noted in 69% of patients at the time of HEN initiation, which improved to 10% after enteral feeds and appropriate vitamin supplementation.ConclusionHEN is safe and effective in treating malnutrition and vitamin deficiencies that might occur as a complication of bariatric surgery, leading to avoidance of parenteral nutrition support in most cases.