000			nab a22 7a 4500
999			_c16763 _d16763
003			PC16763
005			20220317133128.0
008			220317b xxu||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
040			_cH12O
041			_aeng
100			_9383 _aValero Zanuy, María de los Ángeles _eEndocrinología y Nutrición
100			_92335 _aPablos Bravo, Siria _eFarmacia
100			_92337 _aLázaro Cebas, Andrea _eFarmacia Hospitalaria
100			_93017 _aGarcía Sánchez, J _eBioquímica Clínica
100			_91450 _aGomis Muñoz, Pilar _eFarmacia
100			_9442 _aMoreno Villares, José Manuel _eGastroenterología y Nutrición Infantil
100			_91057 _aLeón Sanz, Miguel _eEndocrinología y Nutrición
245	0	0	_aAgreement between different equations to estimate osmolarity of parenteral nutrition solutions. _h[artículo]
260			_bNutrición hospitalaria, _c2015
300			_a32(6):2757-62.
500			_aFormato Vancouver: Valero Zanuy MA, Pablos Bravo S, Lazaro Cebas A, Garcia Sanchez J, Gomis Muñoz P, Moreno Villares JM, Leon Sanz M. Agreement between different equations to estimate osmolarity of parenteral nutrition solutions. Nutr Hosp. 2015 Dec 1;32(6):2757-62.
501			_aPMID: 26667731
504			_aContiene 13 referencias
520			_aBackground: our aim was to measure the osmolality of several PN formulas at different component concentrations to determine if equations described in literature to calculate osmolarity accurately predict osmolalality in other experimental conditions different than these used to develop them. Methods: osmolality of 12 different types of PN solutions, 9 for central and 3 for peripheral perfusion were measured by using freezing point depression in cross-sectional study. We evaluated the agreement (Pearson correlation test) and differential bias between measured osmolality and calculated osmolarity for three different equations described in the literature: Pereira Da Silva, ASPEN Practice Manual and ASPEN guidelines. Results: mean ± SD osmolality of PN solutions was 1789 ± 256 (range 1 540 - 2 372) and 751 ± 64 mOsm/kg (range 689 - 817) for central and peripheral infusion, respectively. The osmolality of PN formulations was mainly due to glucose (r = 0.975) and amino acids (r = 0.948). All studied equations had a good correlation in the bivariate analysis (p = 0.000). All equations had a trend to underestimate the osmolality compared with the measured value. However, ASPEN guidelines equation overestimated the osmolality for peripheral PN. Conclusions: measurement of osmolality of peripheral PN solutions is important to reduce the risk of phlebitis. The different equations described previously show a good correlation between them although in general underestimate the osmolality.
710			_9292 _aServicio de Endocrinología y Nutrición
710			_9320 _aServicio de Farmacia Hospitalaria
710			_9317 _aServicio de Bioquímica Clínica
710			_9446 _aServicio de Pediatría-Neonatología
856			_uhttp://pc-h12o-es.m-hdoct.a17.csinet.es/pdf/pc/1/pc16763.pdf _ySolicitar documento
942			_2ddc _cART _n0