4.7 Article

n-3 Polyunsaturated Fatty Acid Supplementation Affects Oxidative Stress Marker Levels in Patients with Type II Intestinal Failure: A Randomized Double Blind Trial

期刊

ANTIOXIDANTS
卷 12, 期 8, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/antiox12081493

关键词

intestinal failure; oxidative stress; n-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids; fish oil; parenteral nutrition

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study evaluated the effect of 7-day supplementation of n-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids on oxidative stress in patients with Type II intestinal failure receiving parenteral nutrition. The results showed improvements in oxidative stress markers, blood lipids, and hepatic biomarkers after the supplementation.
Type II intestinal failure (IF-II) is a condition in which the gastrointestinal tract is compromised. Liver complications may occur because of the pathology and/or prolonged use of parenteral nutrition (PN); oxidative stress has been implicated as one of the causes. Lipid emulsions containing n-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs) have been proposed for the treatment. We aimed to evaluate the effect of 7-day n-3 PUFA supplementation on oxidative stress in IF-II patients receiving PN. This was a randomized, controlled, double-blinded, pilot trial of adult patients with IF-II, receiving either conventional PN (control) or PN enriched with n-3 PUFAs (intervention). Twenty patients were included (14 men, 49 +/- 16.9 years), with the ANCOVA analysis the glucose (p = 0.003), and direct bilirubin (p = 0.001) levels reduced; whereas the high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) increased (p = 0.017). In the random-effect linear regression analysis, a reduction (p < 0.0001) in the malondialdehyde (MDA) level was found in the intervention group when the covariables age, HDL-C level, and alanine aminotransferase activity were considered. After 1 week of PN supplementation with n-3 PUFAs, the marker levels of some oxidative stress, blood lipids, and hepatic biomarkers improved in patients with IF-II.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据