The Clinicl Comparision Research Of Early Enteral And Parenteral Nutritional Support In Postoperative Patients Of Devscularization Produces With Liver Cirrhosis Complicated With Portal Hypertension Syndrome

Objective To compare the effect and the role of early enteral and parenteral nutritional support in postopemlive patients of devascularization procedures with liver cirrhosis complicated with portal hypertension syndrome. Methods 40 cases of postoperative patients of devascularizafion procedures were selected as resarch ol~jects. According to the statistical principle, those patients were divided into two groups at random and were accepted early enteral or paxenteral nutritional (EN or PN) support respectively. EN group was continuously ftd with solution of Vivonex TEN through nasogastric tube every day. The volume of enteral nutrition solution was increased step by step ranging from 300nil/d to 2lOOniIkL Simultaneously, intravenous injection was gradually aborted in the periods of enteral supplements (4-7 days ). PN group was ceaselessly infused with nutrition solution offering 35 kcal/kg energy and 020g/kg nitrogen per day through central vein. The patients of two groups were strictly fortided to diet nine days after operation From the tenth day of postoperation , diet was permitted in those patients. During research time, the 5 influrnce of two nutritional therapy for patients?general nutrition conditions, N-balance, creatinine height ieta, capability of producing protein, liver fmiction, hepatocellar store, blood velocity ofpoital vein, gut function, bowel bacterial tra location, cellular immimity fimction arKI economic consumption were observed and analysisecL Results Both entenil and parenteral rniirilion were able to improve the patients?general nutrition conditions in a short period. Patients with enteral nutritional support bad less complications. Ruthermore, errteral nutrition had better effects in recovering N-balance and crealinine height reta, accelerating blood velocity of portal vein, enhancing hepatocellar store, stimulating gut motion, preventing bowel bacterial tmnslocation and saving economic consumption than parenteral nutrition hail The statistics difference of two methods was obvious. Conclusions Enteral nutritional support was a kind of secure, resonable and effective nutrition melhocL The initial research results showed that enteral nutrition was better in terms of keeping N-balance, protecting bowel抯 micro-cricumstance, preventing postoperlive complications and diminishing economic consumption ihan parenteral nutrition did.