Systematic Review of Evidence for the Use of Intradialytic Parenteral Nutrition in Malnourished Hemodialysis Patients

Revisiting Intradialytic Parenteral Nutrition: How Can We Apply the Evidence in Clinical Practice?

Intradialytic parenteral nutrition (IDPN) remains a controversial nutrition support practice in hemodialysis. Multiple reviews and evidence-based clinical practice guidelines have been published in the past 20 years. Despite essentially looking at the same evidence, conclusions and recommendations vary significantly, leading to widespread uncertainty among clinicians on the value of and indications for IDPN. This paper aims to bring a clinical perspective to the current state of evidence and clinical practice, recognizing the strengths and weaknesses of current evidence and the clinical questions that remain unanswered, as well as providing guidance for using IDPN in clinical practice. IDPN should be considered a strategy to complement spontaneous oral intake in clinically stable patients receiving maintenance hemodialysis or who have or are at risk of malnutrition and who have substantial but not adequate protein and/or energy intake. There is a clear need for robust randomized controlled trials evaluating the impact of IDPN in appropriately selected patients. Additionally, future trials should include patient-centered outcome measures such as appetite, spontaneous oral intake, quality of life, and reliable measures of nutritional status.

Efficacy of intradialytic amino acids on nutritional status in children with stage 5 chronic kidney disease

BACKGROUND

Protein energy wasting (PEW) is a common cause of morbidity and mortality in patients with stage 5 chronic kidney disease (CKD 5). Intradialytic parenteral nutrition (IDPN) has been used as a therapy for preventing and treating PEW in children with CKD 5 when other conventional modalities fail. However, not enough data is available to define its effectiveness in treating malnutrition in children. This study aims to investigate potential benefits of IDPN in Egyptian children with CKD 5.

METHODS

In this prospective, placebo-controlled, parallel-group single blinded study, we enrolled 50 CKD 5 patients; 25 patients (intervention group) received intravenous amino acids (KIDIMN), while 25 patients (control group) received normal saline as placebo, each given during regular dialysis 3 times a week for 9 months. Patients were subjected to nutritional assessment at baseline and 3-, 6-, and 9-month follow-up using height Z-score, hand grip strength (HGS) for muscle power assessment, body composition monitor (BCM) for assessing lean tissue mass (LTM) and adipose tissue mass (ATM), and biochemical measures including serum albumin, serum triglyceride, and serum cholesterol.

RESULTS

When comparing baseline and 9-month follow-up values, significant improvement was recorded in height Z-score, LTM, and serum albumin in the intervention group unlike the control group where no significant changes were recorded.

CONCLUSION

IDPN is proposed to be an effective method for preventing and treating malnutrition in children with CKD 5. However, further multi-centric studies with larger sample size and longer duration of follow-up are still recommended.

Intradialytic parenteral nutrition improves nutritional status in a complex cystic fibrosis patient with redo double lung transplant and end-stage renal disease

This case study reports on the use of intradialytic parenteral nutrition (IDPN) to address severe malnutrition in a 38-year-old woman, redo double lung transplant recipient with a complex medical history including cystic fibrosis and end-stage renal disease (ESRD) on haemodialysis. Gastroparesis and severe postprandial abdominal pain limited oral/enteral nutrition input. The addition of IDPN resulted in a dry weight increase of 13.6% over a 12-month period and an improvement in the patient's malnutrition status from severe (Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment (PG SGA) C24) to moderate (PG SGA B7). The patient stated she would recommend IDPN to others in a similar situation. Management of patients with coexisting cystic fibrosis and ESRD with or without haemodialysis requires patient engagement in treatment planning and a multidisciplinary team approach for clinical judgement in the absence of guidelines. As advances in medical care see more patients with these coexisting conditions, IDPN may provide an increasingly useful adjunct therapy.

Intradialytic Nutrition and Hemodialysis Prescriptions: A Personalized Stepwise Approach

Dialysis and nutrition are two sides of the same coin—dialysis depurates metabolic waste that is typically produced by food intake. Hence, dietetic restrictions are commonly imposed in order to limit potassium and phosphate and avoid fluid overload. Conversely, malnutrition is a major challenge and, albeit to differing degrees, all nutritional markers are associated with survival. Dialysis-related malnutrition has a multifactorial origin related to uremic syndrome and comorbidities but also to dialysis treatment. Both an insufficient dialysis dose and excessive removal are contributing factors. It is thus not surprising that dialysis alone, without proper nutritional management, often fails to be effective in combatting malnutrition. While composite indexes can be used to identify patients with poor prognosis, none is fully satisfactory, and the definitions of malnutrition and protein energy wasting are still controversial. Furthermore, most nutritional markers and interventions were assessed in hemodialysis patients, while hemodiafiltration and peritoneal dialysis have been less extensively studied. The significant loss of albumin in these two dialysis modalities makes it extremely difficult to interpret common markers and scores. Despite these problems, hemodialysis sessions represent a valuable opportunity to monitor nutritional status and prescribe nutritional interventions, and several approaches have been tried. In this concept paper, we review the current evidence on intradialytic nutrition and propose an algorithm for adapting nutritional interventions to individual patients.

Effectiveness of Intradialytic Parenteral Nutrition in Treating Protein-Energy Wasting in Hemodialysis: A Rapid Systematic Review

Intradialytic parenteral nutrition (IDPN) is commonly requested before recommended therapies in malnourished patients on hemodialysis. This review provides updated critical synthesis of the evidence on the use of IDPN in patients on hemodialysis. We searched MEDLINE, CINAHL, and other sources to identify evidence. Two reviewers sequentially selected studies, abstracted data, rated study quality, and synthesized evidence using predefined criteria. IDPN did not improve clinically relevant outcomes compared with dietary counseling or oral supplementation and had varied results compared with usual care in 12 studies. Data are limited on adverse events or cost-effectiveness of IDPN. Important limitations of the evidence, including limited measurement of clinically important outcomes, methodological concerns, and heterogeneity between studies, weaken our confidence in these findings. IDPN may be a reasonable treatment option for patients who fail to respond or cannot receive recommended treatments, but the broad usage of IDPN before recommended treatment options does not appear warranted.

The Diet and Haemodialysis Dyad: Three Eras, Four Open Questions and Four Paradoxes. A Narrative Review, Towards a Personalized, Patient-Centered Approach

The history of dialysis and diet can be viewed as a series of battles waged against potential threats to patients' lives. In the early years of dialysis, potassium was identified as "the killer", and the lists patients were given of forbidden foods included most plant-derived nourishment. As soon as dialysis became more efficient and survival increased, hyperphosphatemia, was identified as the enemy, generating an even longer list of banned aliments. Conversely, the "third era" finds us combating protein-energy wasting. This review discusses four questions and four paradoxes, regarding the diet-dialysis dyad: are the "magic numbers" of nutritional requirements (calories: 30-35 kcal/kg; proteins > 1.2 g/kg) still valid? Are the guidelines based on the metabolic needs of patients on "conventional" thrice-weekly bicarbonate dialysis applicable to different dialysis schedules, including daily dialysis or haemodiafiltration? The quantity of phosphate and potassium contained in processed and preserved foods may be significantly different from those in untreated foods: what are we eating? Is malnutrition one condition or a combination of conditions? The paradoxes: obesity is associated with higher survival in dialysis, losing weight is associated with mortality, but high BMI is a contraindication for kidney transplantation; it is difficult to limit phosphate intake when a patient is on a high-protein diet, such as the ones usually prescribed on dialysis; low serum albumin is associated with low dialysis efficiency and reduced survival, but on haemodiafiltration, high efficiency is coupled with albumin losses; banning plant derived food may limit consumption of "vascular healthy" food in a vulnerable population. Tailored approaches and agreed practices are needed so that we can identify attainable goals and pursue them in our fragile haemodialysis populations.

Renal consequences of parenteral nutrition

Parenteral nutrition (PN) can be described as the "Intravenous administration of nutrients necessary to sustain life in those who would otherwise have died or suffered serious disease". PN is indicated in children who cannot be fully fed by the oral or intestinal route, usually as a result of intestinal failure. Intradialytic parenteral nutrition (IDPN) is rarely indicated in children on dialysis and does not confer a benefit over enteral supplements in the compliant patient with adequate intestinal function. Renal and metabolic consequences of PN are potentially life-threatening and include disorders of glucose homeostasis, acid-base and fluid and electrolyte disturbances, nephrolithiasis, impaired renal function and metabolic bone disease. Many of these complications are avoidable. Adequate clinical and biochemical assessment and monitoring of children receiving PN by a multidisciplinary nutrition support team is recommended to mitigate against the risks of these complications.

[Efficacy of oral supplementation during dialysis in patients with chronic renal failure]

Protein-calorie malnutrition is common in hemodialysis patients and is a powerful predictor of morbidity and mortality. Nutritional supplementation, administered orally or parenterally, especially during dialysis, may compensate for the relatively inadequate protein and energy intake and improves net protein anabolism in chronic hemodialysis patients. Intradialytic oral nutrition seems preferable to intradialytic parenteral nutrition (IDPN) due to its lower cost and persistence of its anabolic effects after infusion is stopped, and because IDPN induces a higher increase in serum glucose and insulin levels and a greater reduction in serum ghrelin concentrations. Further larger scale randomized, controlled trials of nutritional interventions should be performed in maintenance dialysis patients to assess their efficacy regarding quality of life, morbidity, and mortality.