[Home parenteral nutrition in patients with advanced cancer: experience of a single centre over ten years]

Abstract

The use of Home Parenteral Nutrition (HPN) in patients with advanced cancer without the possibility of curative treatment continues to be a controversial subject entailing a considerable emotional burden. Nonetheless, this group of patients constitutes the main indication for HPN in many programmes.

Goal: To present the characteristics of a series of patients included on an HPN programme over the last ten years.

Method: Retrospective study of the case histories of the 11 patients who received HPN over this period. The demographic and clinical details were noted along with their complications and evolution for comparison with those of a control group of patients with benign disease receiving HPN over the same period. For the comparisons, Student's t test and the chi-squared test were used as and when indicated. Results were considered statistically significant if p < 0.05.

Results: Eleven patients received HPN, nine of them because of an irresoluble intestinal obstruction and two because of a high flow fistula. The mean age at the start of HPN was 50.8 +/- 12.7 years versus 37.3 +/- 17.2 years for the group with benign disease (p < 0.05). The mean duration of HPN was 71.05 +/- 217 days in the first group, notably less than the second (387.15 +/- 995.85; p < 0.05), with a range between 5 and 760 days. The patients received the infusion through a previously implanted subcutaneous reservoir (n = 9) and on two occasions, electively, through a tunnelled catheter. The infection rate was higher in the group with cancer (0.34 episodes per patient and 1,000 days on HPN) than in the group with benign disease (0.08 episodes; p < 0.05). HPN was suspended in only one of the patients more than 5 days prior to death due to clinical deterioration. Two patients required admission due to a complication associated with the technique. In both cases, a fungal infection of the blood made it necessary to withdraw the catheter. The quality of life, measured by means of an activity scale, was similar at the start of HPN in both groups. None of the patients included on the programme is still alive.

Conclusions: HPN offers patients with advanced cancer and severe intestinal dysfunction the possibility of an at-home treatment with a low complication rate. If we take into account the short mean duration of HPN, inclusion on the programme must be assessed individually and regularly revised.