4.6 Article

Response pattern recognition in paediatric Crohn's disease patients treated with enteral nutrition

Journal

JOURNAL OF CROHNS & COLITIS
Volume 2, Issue 3, Pages 233-236

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1016/j.crohns.2008.03.003

Keywords

IBD; Crohn's disease; Paediatric; Enteral; Nutrition; Treatment

Funding

  1. Danish Crohn Colitis Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Aim: To describe the response pattern to enteral nutrition (EN) in paediatric patients with moderately to severely active Crohn's disease (CD). Material and methods: A previously described method for assessment of response pattern to various treatments for CD was used. Patients who received EN during the 10-year period 1995-2005 were prospectively registered. Patient data, clinical outcome, time to relapse and subsequent need for treatment were extracted from the files. Four weeks treatment with polymeric ready-to-use liquid formula was given. The clinical outcome was assessed by pattern recognition of the disease course 30 days (immediate response) and 90 days (long-term response) after start of EN. Results: Thirty-one patients (17/14 M/F), median age 14 years (range 7.5-19.8 years), received 46 courses of EN. Thirty-seven courses (80%) were completed. Immediate response: twenty-five courses (67%) led to complete response (CR), 8 (22%) to partial response (PR) and in 4 courses (11%) no response (NR) was achieved. Long-term response: 21 courses (64%) led to prolonged response (PRO), defined as either maintenance of complete response (CR) or partial response (PR), while 12 courses (36%) were followed by loss of response (LR). The median time to relapse was 8.3 months (range 0.5-39 months). Conclusion: We found our model of response pattern to be a useful instrument for the description of results obtained during EN in children with CD. (c) 2008 European Crohn's and Colitis Organisation. Published by Elsevier B.V. All righs reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available