RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Most studies on alternative intravenous lipid emulsion (IVLE) versus conventional IVLE have been conducted in the critically ill patients. The benefits of alternative IVLE in non-critically ill patients is uncertain. We aim to determine clinical outcome difference between alternative IVLE versus conventional IVLE in non-critically ill patients. METHOD: All patients on parenteral nutrition (PN) from July 2007 to September 2010 were identified. Patients were stratified into two groups: conventional IVLE (soybean oil-based) and alternative IVLEs, namely MCT oil-based, olive oil-based and fish oil-containing IVLE. RESULT: Three hundred and eighty-eight patients were included in the study. Ninety-one patients received soybean-based IVLE, 59 patients received MCT oil-based IVLE, 141 patients received olive oil-based IVLE and 97 patients received fish oil-containing IVLE. Adjusting the effect of baseline covariates in separate multiple linear/logistic regression models, there were no differences in mortality, readmission, length of stay and infection between conventional IVLE group and alternative IVLEs group, the adjusted p-value was 0.64, 0.06, 0.36 and 0.18 respectively. However, there was a significant change in day 5 CRP between these two groups (8.43 g/L (SD 112.2) vs -41.2 (SD 106.4); adjusted p-value = 0.01). There was no difference in day 5 albumin between these two group (-1.03 (SD 5.1) vs -0.1 (SD 5.3); adjusted p-value = 0.08). CONCLUSION: Our study showed that pertinent clinical outcomes in non-critically ill patients who received either conventional IVLE or alternative IVLEs were the same. However, there was significant reduction in day-5 CRP in alternative IVLE compared to conventional IVLE.
