Background To determine feasibility and safety of proactive enteral tube feeding (ETF) in pediatric oncology patients. Methods Pediatric patients with newly diagnosed brain tumors, myeloid leukemia or high‐risk solid tumors were eligible. Subjects agreeing to start ETF before cycle 2 chemotherapy were considered proactive participants (PPs). Those who declined could enroll as chart collection receiving nutritional standard of care. Nutritional status was assessed using standard anthropometric measurements. Episodes of infection and toxicity related to ETF were documented from diagnosis to end of therapy. A descriptive comparison between PPs and controls was conducted. Results One hundred four eligible patients were identified; 69 enrolled (20 PPs and 49 controls). At diagnosis, 17% of all subjects were underweight and 26% overweight. Barriers to enrollment included physician, subject and/or family refusal, and inability to initiate ETF prior to cycle 2 of chemotherapy. Toxicity of ETF was minimal, but higher percentage of subjects in the proactive group had episodes of infection than controls. Thirty‐nine percent of controls eventually started ETF and were twice as likely to receive parenteral nutrition. PPs experienced less weight loss at ETF initiation than controls receiving ETF and were the only group to demonstrate improved nutritional status at end of study. Conclusions Proactive ETF is feasible in children with cancer and results in improved nutritional status at end of therapy. Episodes of infection in this study are concerning; therefore, a larger randomized trial is required to further delineate infectious risks and toxicities that may be mitigated by improved nutritional status. Pediatr Blood Cancer 2014;61:281–285. © 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

In contrast to observations in earlier studies, findings indicate poor agreement in inter-rater reliability. Although there was moderate agreement in intra-rater reliability, one would expect to find stronger, even perfect, intra-rater reliability. These findings suggest the need to develop a specific physical status classification system directed toward patients with a systemic illness such as cancer in both young and adult patients.

BackgroundIn a climate of cost containment, it is critical to analyze and optimize all perioperative variable costs. Fresh gas flow is one important variable that determines utilization of inhalational agents and can be tightly controlled by the anesthesia provider. Manufacturers of inhalational agents have recommendations for minimum gas flow for their respective agents. Any gas flow above these recommendations is considered misuse and leads to unnecessary expense. The purpose of this study was to characterize and quantify the excess use of inhalational agents by analyzing fresh gas flow rates for long duration cases.MethodsOver a span of three months, operating room records were analyzed for all procedures lasting greater than 4 hours. End tidal inhalation agent percentage for Sevoflurane and Isoflurane and fresh gas flows were analyzed. 303 unique patients with at least 4 hours of anesthesia time were included. Analysis excluded the first and last 30 minutes of all anesthetics to account for need for higher gas flows during induction/emergence of anesthesia. 152 patients received sevoflurane alone. 33 patients received isoflurane alone. 107 patients received both isoflurane and sevoflurane and were included in sevoflurane group given the higher gas flow needs of sevoflurane. 11 patients received neither agent and were excluded from analysis. We proceed with n = 292 unique patients. (259 in Sevo, 33 in iso) We used the two-sided one sample t-test setting 2 ml/min as the null for sevo and 1 ml/min as the null for iso; we ran analysis using a nonparametric test that didn’t require the fresh gas flow to be normally distributed - the two-sided one-sample Wilcoxon rank-sum test: p value = < 0.0001.ResultsThe results of our study revealed a sevoflurane (n = 259) mean fresh gas flow (L/min) 2.55 (95% CI, 2.45-2.66) - significantly different from null of 2 ml/min (p < 0.0001). Isoflurane (n = 33) mean fresh gas flows (L/min) 2.33 (95% CI, 2.00-2.66) - significantly different from null of 1 l/min (p < 0.0001).ConclusionManufacturer recommendation for sevoflurane is to maintain gas flows 1-2 l/min and Isoflurane at above 1 l/min. Given these recommendations, the anesthesia providers delivered fresh gas flows at least 28% higher than necessary for sevoflurane and at least 130% greater than necessary for isoflurane anesthetics that lasted greater than 4 hours. This is an area where cost reduction can be readily achieved. Future plans to realize a reduction in inhalational agent utilization include education of the benefits of fresh gas flow and instituting a low fresh gas flow policy.

No abstract