Home About us Editorial board Ahead of print Current issue Search Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 
  • Users Online: 1640
  • Home
  • Print this page
  • Email this page
Year : 2020  |  Volume : 6  |  Issue : 4  |  Page : 294-300

The use of calorically dense enteral formulas in adult home enteral nutrition population in a tertiary care center: A retrospective analysis

1 Division of Endocrinology, Diabetes, Metabolism and Nutrition, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
2 Division of Endocrinology, Diabetes, Metabolism and Nutrition, Mayo Clinic; Division of General Internal Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, Division of Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition, University of Louisville, KY, USA

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Manpreet S Mundi
Division of Endocrinology, Diabetes, Metabolism, and Nutrition, Mayo Clinic, 200 First St SW, Rochester, MN 55905
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/IJAM.IJAM_92_20

Rights and Permissions

Introduction: The prevalence of home enteral nutrition (HEN) has increased dramatically as studies showing clinical benefit have emerged. During this time, the practice of HEN has evolved as well including the availability of diverse formulas ranging in macronutrient distribution and concentration. Despite this availability, there continues to be a paucity of data regarding the efficacy of 2.0 kcal/ml density formulas in the HEN population. Materials and Methods: A retrospective review of HEN database was conducted for the use of concentrated formula (2.0 kcal/ml). Baseline variables as well as efficacy of formula were assessed. Results: In the time period evaluated, 32 HEN patients with a mean age of 58 ± 13.4 years met inclusion criteria. A total of 25 (78.1%) patients were male, the most common indication for HEN was dysphagia (53.1%), and the most common diagnosis was head-and-neck cancer (65.7%). The vast majority (87.4%) received concentrated formula through percutaneous gastrostomy (PEG) and were able to receive 93.1% ±19.7% of their goal calories needs as well as 98.5% ±21.7% of their goal protein needs. A total of 9 (28%) patients were initially started on concentrated formula, whereas 23 (72%) were switched from their initial formula with most common indication being the need for additional calories. Twenty-nine patients (90.6%) were able to utilize the formula as their primary source of nutrition with 22 patients (69%) reported no adverse effects. Conclusions: Our study found that the use of concentrated formula was well tolerated in a diverse cohort of patients, meeting their calorie and protein needs. The following core competencies are addressed in this article: Medical knowledge, Practice-based learning, Systems-based practice.

Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)

 Article Access Statistics
    PDF Downloaded126    
    Comments [Add]    
    Cited by others 1    

Recommend this journal