4.2 Article

Nutrition and Pancreatic Enzyme Intake in Patients With Cystic Fibrosis With Distal Intestinal Obstruction Syndrome

Journal

NUTRITION IN CLINICAL PRACTICE
Volume 30, Issue 1, Pages 134-137

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1177/0884533614551838

Keywords

exocrine pancreatic insufficiency; nutrition therapy; pancrelipase; distal intestinal obstruction syndrome; cystic fibrosis; pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: The etiology of distal intestinal obstruction syndrome (DIOS) remains unclear. Food intake and pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy (PERT) are often blamed for its occurrence. This study evaluates the nutrition intake and PERT of patients with cystic fibrosis (CF) at a first episode of DIOS. Methods: All patients with CF perform annually a 3-day intake diary to evaluate their caloric, protein, fat, dietary fiber, liquid, and PERT intake. Patients diagnosed with a first episode of DIOS (n = 12) retrospectively completed an intake diary of the 3 days preceding the DIOS episode supervised by an expert dietitian. Results were compared with those of 1 year before and also with 36 CF controls matched for age, sex, genotype, and disease severity. All were pancreatic insufficient. Results: A first DIOS episode was diagnosed in 12 patients with CF. Only the absolute median fat intake (P = .015) and pancreatic enzyme intake (P = .035) were higher at the time of the DIOS attack in comparison to the preceding year. This could result from the difference in data collection or from the recommendations to increase fat intake and concomitant enzyme intake, since this trend was also found in the control group. The significant difference disappears when enzyme intake is expressed as units of lipase/g of fat. No other significant dietary differences were found. Conclusions: This study provides no indications for a potential role of nutrition factors or pancreatic enzymes in the first occurrence of DIOS.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available