Bazı Parenteral Nütrisyon Solüsyonlarının Makro Besin Ögesi ve Alüminyum İçeriğinin Belirlenmesi

Abstract

Aluminium (Al) contamination of parenteral nutrition (PN) solutions has been known for over 30 years. Especially vascular intake of Al leads to accumulation in tissues. In addition, the nervous system, musculoskeletal, respiratory system, cardiovascular system, hepatobiliary system, endocrine system, reproductive system can affect these systems. The purpose of this study was to determine the Al concentration and macronutrient and energy content of PN solution used in Turkey. In this study, 8 all-in-one PN solutions which named PN1, PN2, PN3, PN4, PN5, PN6, PN7 and PN8 were examined. Aluminium concentration was analysed by high performance liquid chromatography. The protein content of solutions was measured by Kjehldahl method, oil content was anaysed by Soxhelet method and oil content was measured by aqueous extraction method. Moisture and ash determined. Carbohydrate composition is determined as the percentage (%) remaining from protein, oil, moisture and ash compositions. Energy value was measured with a bomb calorimeter. It has been found that mean Al concentration of glucose solutions of PN solutions was 16,36±8,31 µg/L, the mean Al concentration of amino acid solutions was 4,96±3,73 µg/L, the mean Al concentration of the lipid solution was 9,09±11,23 µg/L. The Al concentration of a PN5 glucose and PN2 lipid solution is above 25 µg/L, which the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) considers to be a limit. When the macronutrients were analysed, there was no significant difference in the PN1-7 solutions for protein amounts between the label information and the amounts determined by the analysis (p>0,05), whereas there was a significant difference in the PN8 solution (p<0.05). For the amount of fat, there was a significant difference in the PN1-8 solution according to the Soxhelet method (p<0.05). According to the method of aqueous hekzan extraction, there was a significant difference in PN2 and PN5-8 solutions (p<0,05), but there was no significant difference in PN1, PN3 and PN4 solutions (p>0.05). There is a significant difference in energy values for PN1-8 solutions compared to label information (p<0.05). In conclusion, it was not finded any studies to examine Al concentrations of all-in-one solutions with HPLC in the literature. In two of the analysed solutions, a higher concentration of Al was observed than the value accepted by the FDA. In addition, nutrients compared to the label information were 30.04% lower in energy, 50.98% lower in fat and 5.3% lower in protein.