This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Sigalet, D.L. Articles by van Aerde, J. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Sigalet, D.L. Articles by van Aerde, J. Pubmed/NCBI databases Compound via MeSH Substance via MeSH Hazardous Substances DB CIMETIDINE CODEINE Medline Plus Health Information Dietary Fats Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Nutritional Effects of Surgical and Medical Treatment for Short Bowel Syndrome

Department of Surgery, Alberta Children's Hospital, University of Calgary, Alberta, sigalet{at}ucalgary.ca

G.M. Lees, MD

Department of Surgery, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada

F.X. Aherne, PhD

Faculty of Animal Sciences, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada

R. Fedorak, MD

Department of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine

M. Keelan, PhD

Department of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada

A.B.R. Thomson, MD, PhD

Department of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada

J. van Aerde, MD, PhD

Department of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada

Background: The choice of treatment options in short bowel syndrome (SBS) is hampered by a lack of comparative studies. This study uses a previously validated juvenile pig model of SBS to compare nontreated controls (C), surgical treatment with either proximal colon interposition (CI) or bowel lengthening (BL), with medical treatment with codeine and cimetidine (M). Methods: Treatment was initiated 6 weeks after resection of 75% of the small bowel, and animals were followed until sacrifice at week 16. Feed intake and weight gain were monitored throughout; in vivo nutrient absorption, in vitro nutrient transport, sodium-glucose cotransporter activity, and intestinal morphology (gross and microscopic) were examined at the end of treatment. Results: BL and M treatments resulted in improved rates of weight gain; this improvement was associated with improved absorption of dietary fat. The treatments did not affect carbohydrate or protein absorption in vivo. In vitro fatty acid absorption was not increased in any group. Active uptake of glucose was increased in the colon interposition group, but phlorizin binding (reflecting sodium glucose cotransporter activity) did not differ between groups. Gross serosal and microscopic mucosal surface areas increased in all groups; however, there were no significant differences between the treatment groups. Conclusions: These results demonstrate that bowel lengthening and medical treatment improved the rate of weight gain in this model of SBS. This appeared to be due to improvement in the absorption of dietary fat, which was not caused by alterations in in vitro uptake or mucosal surface area, suggesting these treatments have their affects by altering motility or intraluminal digestion. These findings suggest that these treatments are worthy of further study in treating patients (primary pediatric) with SBS. (Journal of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition 25:330-336, 2001)

Journal of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition, Vol. 25, No. 6, 330-336 (2001)
DOI: 10.1177/0148607101025006330


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				J. S. Thompson Nutritional Effects of Surgical and Medical Treatment for Short Bowel Syndrome JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr, November 1, 2001; 25(6): 337 - 337. [PDF]