[Clinical analysis of enteral nutrition in 47 children].

OBJECTIVE: To explore the efficacy and safety of the application of enteral nutrition (EN) in gastrointestinal disease in children, and to explore the possibility of the implementation of family EN.

METHOD: Retrospective analysis of disease spectrum, EN approach, preparation, speed and time as well as adverse reactions and outcomes in 47 pediatric patients with gastrointestinal disease underwent EN therapy during July 2014 to March 2015. The nutrition indicators before and after EN therapy were compared by paired t-test.

RESULT: A total of 47 patients were selected, 27 male (57%) and 20 female (43%), aged 0.8 (0.3, 4.0) years, 9 with mechanical or chemical damage to the esophagus, 7 with inflammatory bowel disease (including ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease), 6 with chronic diarrhea, 5 with acute pancreatitis, 3 with acute diarrhea and severe malnutrition, 3 with short bowel syndrome, 3 with improper feeding, 3 with feeding difficulties, 3 with protein losing enteropathy, 2 with post-enterostomy, 2 with enterocolitis, 1 with gastroesophageal reflux, were diagnosed. Of 47 cases, 22 were given oral nutrition, 28 were fed with nasogastric tube and 4 with nasojejunal tube feeding, 2 with percutaneous endoscopic gastrojejunostomy tube feeding for each. In these tube-feeding cases, 20 cases were treated with continuous infusion and 21 cases with intermittent infusion. Eleven cases were fed with amino acid formula; 21 cases took the choice of peptide formulations; 16 cases chose whole protein formula, including six cases who chose 3.3-4.2 kJ/ml higher energy density formula, 10 cases selected common energy density formula including breast milk. Twenty-one cases suffered from different degrees of adverse reactions, including vomiting in 7 cases, abdominal pain and bloating in 3, diarrhea in 12, secondary respiratory infections in 5. Five patients were discharged after giving up of treatment by parents due to poor efficacy on primary disease; 3 cases were transferred to other departments for further treatment; 15 cases were discharged with a feeding tube for family nutrition and specialist out-patient treatment. The rest 24 cases were all improved and discharged. There were significant differences in nutrition indicators before and after EN, weight-for-age Z score (WAZ)(-2.3±1.9 vs. -1.9±1.8, t=4.156, P=0.000), weight-for-height Z score (WHZ)(-1.9±1.7 vs. -1.2±1.5, t=3.714, P=0.001), albumin ((35±9)g/L vs.(39±6) g/L, t=3.017, P=0.005) and prealbumin ((0.11±0.05)g/L vs.(0.18±0.07)g/L, t=5.144, P=0.000).

CONCLUSION: EN is suitable for a variety of children's digestive diseases, which can improve the nutritional status of the patients and was safe for clinical application. As the implementation of EN is simple and has good compliance, family EN is proven to be feasible.