SciELO - Scientific Electronic Library Online

 
vol.42 número3Evaluación de los servicios farmacéuticos en farmacias públicas hospitalarias del Distrito Federal-BrasilEl reto del envejecimiento y la complejidad farmacoterapéutica en el paciente VIH + índice de autoresíndice de materiabúsqueda de artículos
Home Pagelista alfabética de revistas  

Servicios Personalizados

Revista

Articulo

Indicadores

Links relacionados

  • En proceso de indezaciónCitado por Google
  • No hay articulos similaresSimilares en SciELO
  • En proceso de indezaciónSimilares en Google

Compartir


Farmacia Hospitalaria

versión On-line ISSN 2171-8695versión impresa ISSN 1130-6343

Farm Hosp. vol.42 no.3 Toledo may./jun. 2018

https://dx.doi.org/10.7399/fh.10954 

ORIGINALS

Phytosterol determination in lipid emulsions for parenteral nutrition

Josep-M. Llop-Talaverón1  2  3  , Ana Novak3  , Josep-M. Suñé-Negre2  3  , María Badia-Tahull1  2  , Elisabet Leiva-Badosa1  2  , Josep-R. Ticó-Grau2  3 

1Servicio de Farmacia, Hospital Universitari de Bellvitge, L’Hospitalet de Llobregat. Spain.

2Grupo de Farmacoterapia, Farmacogenética y Tecnología Farmacéutica, Instituto de Investigación Biomédica de Bellvitge (IDIBELL), L’Hospitalet de Llobregat. Spain.

3Departamento de Farmacia y Tecnología Farmacéutica, y Fisicoquímica, Facultad de Farmacia y Ciencias de la Alimentación, Universidad de Barcelona, Barcelona. Spain.

Abstract

Objective:

The presence of phytosterols in vegetal lipid emulsions has been associated with alterations of liver function tests. Determination of phytosterols content, currently undeclared, would allow the development of strategies to prevent or treat these alterations.

Method:

3-4 non-consecutive batches of 6 lipid emulsions from different providers (Clinoleic™, Intralipid™, Lipofundina™, Lipoplus™, Omegaven™ and Smoflipid™) were analyzed. Differences in total phytosterol assay between providers and batches were statistically studied by a one-way ANOVA and Kruskal-Wallis non-parametric approximation and post hoc Scheffé test (p < 0.05)

Results:

The absence of phytosterols was confirmed in Omegaven™, emulsion based on fish oil. The highest assay of phytosterols (422.4 ± 130.5 µg/mL) has been related with the highest percentage of soya bean oil in Intralipid. In the remaining emulsions, concentrations were from 120 to 210 µg/mL related to the percentage of soya bean oil. Statistically significant differences of phytosterol content in lipid emulsions were observed among different providers (F = 23.59; p = 0.000) as well as among non-consecutive batches. Clinolenic™ (F = 23.59; p = 0.000), Intralipid™ (F = 978.25; p = 0.000), Lipofundina™ TCL/TCM (F = 5.43; p = 0.045), Lipoplus™ (F = 123.53; p = 0.000) and Smoflipid™ (16.78; p = 0.000). Except for Lipofundina™ TCL/TCM, the differences between batches were marked.

Conclusions:

Lipid emulsions, registered on Spanish pharmaceutical market, contain variable quantities of phytosterols dependent on commercial brand and batch.

KEYWORDS: Phytosterols; Lipid emulsions; Parenteral nutrition; Soybean oil; Liver function tests

Resumen

Objetivo:

La presencia de fitoesteroles en emulsiones lipídicas de origen vegetal se ha relacionado con la aparición de alteraciones de los parámetros de la función hepática. El objetivo es determinar la presencia de fitoesteroles en las emulsiones registradas en el mercado farmacéutico.

Método:

Se analizaron tres-cuatro lotes no consecutivos de seis marcas distintas de emulsiones lipídicas (Clinoleic®, Intralipid®, Lipofundina®, Lipoplus®, Omegaven® y Smoflipid®) y las diferencias en contenido de fitoesteroles totales entre marcas y entre lotes se estudiaron estadísticamente (ANOVA de un factor, aproximación no paramétrica de Kruskal-Wallis y análisis post hoc Scheffé; p < 0,05).

Resultados:

Se encontró ausencia de fitoesteroles en el preparado Omegaven® con aceite de pescado. El contenido más alto de fitoesteroles (422,4 ± 130,5 µg/mL) coincidió con el porcentaje más alto de aceite de soja (Intralipid®). En el resto de las emulsiones se detectaron concentraciones de fitoesteroles entre 120 y 210 µg/mL, relacionadas con el contenido de aceite de soja. Se observaron diferencias estadísticamente significativas entre todas las marcas de emulsiones lipídicas (F = 42,97; p = 0,000) y entre lotes no consecutivos. Clinolenic® (F = 23,59; p = 0,000); Intralipid® (F = 978,25; p = 0,000); Lipofundina® TCL/TCM (F = 5,43; p = 0,045); Lipoplus® (F = 123,53; p = 0,000),; y Smoflipid® (16,78; p = 0,000). Excepto en el caso de la Lipofundina® TCL/TCM las diferencias entre lotes fueron marcadas. Conclusiones: Las emulsiones lipídicas registradas en el mercado farmacéutico español contienen cantidades variables de fitoesteroles en función de la marca comercial y el lote. La determinación del contenido de fitoesteroles, actualmente no declarados, permitiría desarrollar estrategias para prevenir o tratar la aparición de estas alteraciones.

PALABRAS CLAVE: Fitoesteroles; Emulsiones lipídicas; Nutrición parenteral; Aceite de soja; Parámetros de función hepática

Introduction

Lipid emulsions (LEs) are routinely used in parenteral nutrition (PN). Prior to the inclusion of LEs in these formulas, PN required high amounts of glucose, which was associated with a range of problems1. The high energy efficiency of lipids led to a reduction in the use of glucose.

In Spain, the use of LEs in PN became routine practice in the 1980s. Initially, all LEs were based on soybeans, but since then a range of formulations has been developed. Currently, 5 LEs are registered for the Spanish pharmaceutical market. They are based on soybeans, olives, medium-chain triglycerides (MCTs), and fish oil in different concentrations and combinations.

Although LEs were initially used as an energy substrate, the anti-inflammatory effect of fish oil2,3 and the lower lipid peroxidation effect of olive oil4 has led to these lipids being proposed as pharmaconutrients.

Parenteral nutrition-associated liver disease is one of the most relevant complications of PN. Parenteral nutrition-associated liver disease has a multifactorial component5,6,7, and the quantity and type of lipid8,9 have clearly been established as among the factors associated with the disease. Therefore, it is relatively common in clinical practice to reduce doses or to even temporarily stop the administration of lipids altogether10,11. For several years, it was hypothesised that these complications were associated with the use of plant-based LEs. Since the time of the study by Clayton in the paediatric population12, this possibility has been attributed to the presence of phytosterols, which hypothesis was subsequently confirmed in adult patients by our study group13. The phytosterol content of LEs is currently undeclared, and thus does not appear in the Summary of Product Characteristics or on the label. Currently, all emulsions available on the Spanish pharmaceutical market contain variable amounts of plant-based lipids and therefore contain phytosterols. This means that LE use entails their erratic administration.

Phytosterols occur in plants and are considered to be equivalent to cholesterol due to their having a similar sterol structure and similar functions in cell membrane regulation. There has been a recent increase in their clinical importance due to their demonstrated beneficial effects on cholesterol reduction when orally administered14,15,16. Due to their potential hepatotoxicity, the determination of phytosterol content in LEs would improve the management and prevention of hepatic complications in PN.

Gas chromatography (GC) and high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) analytical methods, particularly for the analysis of food and plant extracts, are available for the qualitative and quantitative determination of phytosterols. Gas chromatography can simultaneously determine phytosterols, whereas the available HPLC methods can only identify a few phytosterols and only under particular conditions17.

We developed a simple HPLC analytical method for the routine determination of phytosterol content in parenteral LEs. The objective of this study was to determine differences in the phytosterol content of LEs available on the Spanish pharmaceutical market according to their formulation, brand, and batch.

Methods

We prospectively analysed intravenous LEs with different compositions available on the Spanish pharmaceutical market (Table 1) to determine daily exposure to phytosterols in patients with PN.

Table 1. Intravenous Lipid Emulsions and Their Composition as Declared by the Manufacturer 

MCT: medium chain triglycerides; LCT: long chain triglycerides.

To better simulate clinical practice in Spain, we established different scenarios according to the brand of LE and batch. Thus, we studied 3-4 batches of each of the 5 plant-based LEs available on the Spanish pharmaceutical market. Batches corresponded to non-consecutive shipments.

We included Omegaven™, which is an LE exclusively based on fish oil. This LE was imported because it is not registered in the Spanish pharmaceutical market.

We developed an HPLC analytical method for the routine quantification of phytosterols by establishing a sample preparation protocol. This method can simply and effectively separate phytosterols from the matrix. The aim was to obtain phytosterol samples with a high extraction percentage and good repeatability in a short period of time. Liquid chromatography was performed using a Dionex Ultimate 300018 chromatography system.

Differences in total phytosterol assay between the 5 brands and between batches were analysed using one-way ANOVA, post hoc multiple-comparison Scheffé test (P<.05), and nonparametric Kruskal-Wallis test.

Data were analysed using IBM SPSS 22.0 software. A P value of <.05 was used as a cutoff for statistical significance, using a two-tailed test.

Results

The proposed analytical method allowed us to simplify sample preparation and conduct a single analysis, which led to the successful separation of 8 phytosterols, cholesterol, and squalene. The validation process showed that the method is suitable for routine analysis.

The analysis of LE brands (Table 2) showed that the fish-oil-based LE Omegaven™ did not contain phytosterols. This finding was in line with previously published results3,5, and therefore Omegaven™ was excluded from the statistical analysis. Intralipid is based completely on soybean oil. Its analysis showed that it contained the highest concentration of phytosterols (422.4 ± 130.5 µg/mL) and confirmed that soybean oil was the source of its high phytosterol content. The analysis showed that the other LE brands had variable phytosterol content ranging from 120 µg/mL to 210 µg/mL, depending on the percentage of soybean oil. Statistically significant differences were found between these brands (F = 42.97; p = 0.00). A weak correlation was found between phytosterol concentrations and greater plant-based lipid content, especially when the LE was based on soybeans.

Table 2. Differences in Total Phytosterol Content by Brand 

F = 42.976; significance value = 0.000. Statistically significant difference using one-way ANOVA variance analysis and non-parametric Kruskal-Wallis test (Omegaven™ was excluded from the statistical analysis). *Post hoc Scheffé test: 1, Clinoleic™; 2, Intralipid™; 3, Lipofundin™ LCT/MCT; 4, Lipoplus™; 5, Smoflipid™.

The second part of the study analysed phytosterol content in various non-consecutive batches of LEs (Table 3). Statistically significant differences were also found between different batches: Clinoleic (F = 23.59; p = 0.000), Intralipid (F = 978.25; p = 0.000), Lipofundin LCT/MCT (F = 5.43; p < 0.045), Lipoplus (F = 123.53; p = 0.000), and Smoflipid (16.78; p = 0.000). Except in the case of Lipofundin LCT/MCT, the differences between batches were substantial.

Table 3. Differences in Total Phytosterol Content by Batch 

* Statistically significant differences with one-way ANOVA and non-parametric Kruskal-Wallis test.

** Post hoc Scheffé test: 1, Clinoleic™; 2, Intralipid™; 3, Lipofundin™ LCT/MCT; 4, Lipoplus™; 5, Smoflipid™.

Discussion

We developed an HPLC analytical method to simplify and reduce the cost of determining phytosterol content in Les18. The validation process demonstrated its selectivity, linearity, precision, accuracy, and robustness, all of which support its routine use18. The sample treatment protocol for the commercially available LEs is an adapted version of published protocols19, and it took into account the properties of the samples and the requirements of the analytical method. We used this method to determine the phytoste rol content of all the LEs registered in the Spanish pharmaceutical market, and thus we were able to determine their impact on clinical practice in Spain.

A recent observational study on the use of LEs in 22 hospitals in Catalonia clearly showed the diversity of LEs used and differences in use criteria. These criteria were mainly based on economic management policies and, in some cases, on the level of stress of the candidate participants20. Apart from the established criteria for LE selection, our study introduces the new criterion of phytosterol content in order to prevent or correct the abnormalities in liver function parameters commonly seen in patients with PN.

Few studies have analysed different series of LEs to assess their phytosterol content and their impact on liver function. Meisel et al.21 compared 5 LEs in a murine model and showed that liver function abnormalities depended on the formulation of the administered LE. In this murine model, fish oil prevented hepatic steatosis. Forchielli in 201022 found statistically significant differences in phytosterol content between different commercial preparations. In the clinical setting, Savini et al.23 found an association between phytosterol intake and plasma phytosterol concentrations in uncomplicated preterm infants receiving routine PN. The latter two studies on different types of LEs showed that phytosterol content ranged from 50 µg/mL to 400 µg/ mL. This range was also confirmed in our series.

In 2014, the American Society of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition (ASPEN) published an updated position paper24 that analysed several studies25,26,27 on phytosterol concentrations in LEs in order to gain better knowledge of phytosterol content in LEs for clinical purposes. ASPEN consulted with the manufacturers to validate the accuracy of the information in the document.

The determination of phytosterols in LEs would enable the amount administered to be quantified, thus facilitating better control of one of the relevant factors that may lead to parenteral nutrition-associated liver disease. An alternative could be the administration of LEs with a low phytosterol content or of non-plant-based emulsions, such as fish oil. The promising results obtained by replacing plant-based LEs with fish oil-based Les28,29 suggest that the elimination of phytosterols could be associated with improvements in liver function parameters, although randomized studies are needed to determine if the absence of phytosterols is also compensated by other properties or components of fish oil-based LEs.

The present study is the first to determine the presence of phytosterols in all the lipid emulsions registered on the Spanish pharmaceutical market and, unlike the aforementioned studies, it confirms the great variability in phytosterol content by brand and batch with its consequent clinical implications. The results highlight the relevance of including the total phytosterol concentration of each preparation released onto the market in the Summary of Product Characteristics to facilitate better and safer use in clinical practice.

Contribution to the scientific literature

Recent studies have shown that long-term PN leads to liver function abnormalities, which have been attributed to the phytosterol content of LEs. This study determined the total phytosterol content of the LEs registered on the Spanish pharmaceutical market. The results confirm that there is significant variability between different brands of LEs and between different batches. The results provide a basis on which to design strategies to prevent their hepatotoxic effects.

Bibliography

Wretlind A. Development of fat emulsions. J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 1981;5(3):230-5. [ Links ]

Manzanares W, Dhaliwal R, Jurewitsch B, Stapleton RD, Jeejeebhoy KN, Heyland DK. Alternative lipid emulsions in the critically ill: a systematic review of the evidence. Intensive Care Med. 2013;39(10):1683-94. [ Links ]

Han YY, Lai SL, Ko WJ, Chou CH, Lai HS. Effects of fish oil on inflammatory modulation in surgical intensive care unit patients. Nutr Clin Pract. 2012;27(1):91-8. [ Links ]

Manzanares W, Langlois PL. Fish oil containing lipid emulsions in critically ill patients: Critical analysis and future perspectives. Med Intensiva. 2016;40(1):39-45. [ Links ]

Piper SN, Schade Beschmann RB, Maleck WH, Boldt J, Röhm KD. Hepatocellular integrity after parenteral nutrition: comparison of a fish-oil-containing lipid emulsion with an olive-soybean oil-based lipid emulsion. Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2009;26:1076-82. [ Links ]

Tillman EM. Review and clinical update on parenteral nutrition-associated liver disease. Nutr Clin Pract. 2013;28:30-9. [ Links ]

Carter BA, Shulman RJ. Mechanisms of disease: update on the molecular etiology and fundamentals of parenteral nutrition associated cholestasis. Nat Clin Pract Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2007;4:277-87. [ Links ]

Moreno JM. Complicaciones hepáticas asociadas al uso de nutrición parenteral. Nutr Hosp. 2008;23(Supl. 2):25- 33. [ Links ]

Lloyd DA, Gabe SM. Managing liver dysfunction in parenteral nutrition. Proc Nutr Soc. 2007;66(4):530-8. [ Links ]

Btaiche IF, Khalidi N. Metabolic complications of parenteral nutrition in adults, part 2. Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2004;61(19):2050-7. [ Links ]

Vafa H, Ballarin A, Arvanitakis M, Verrecken S, Dutat F, Lagasse C, et al. Lessons from a 20 year experience of Home Parenteral Nutrition in adult patient. Acta Gastroenterol Belg. 2010;73(4):451-6. [ Links ]

Clayton PT, Bowron A, Mills KA, Massoud A, Casteels M, Milla PJ. Phytosterolemia in children with parenteral nutrition-associated cholestatic liver disease. Gastroenterology. 1993;105:1806-13. [ Links ]

Llop J, Virgili M, Moreno JM, García-Peris P, Serrano T, Forga M, et al. Phytosterolemia in parenteral nutrition patients: Implications for liver disease development. Nutrition. 2008;24(11-12):1145-52. [ Links ]

Fernandes OP, Cabral JM. Phytosterols: Applications and recovery methods. Bioresour. Technol. 2007;98(12):2335-50. [ Links ]

Jones PJ, MacDougall DE, Ntanios C, Vanstone CA. Dietary phytosterols as cholesterol-lowering agents in humans. Can. J. Physiol. Pharmacol. 1997;75(3): 217-27. [ Links ]

de Jong A, Plat J, Mensink RP. Metabolic effects of plant sterols and stanols (Review). J. Nutr. Biochem. 2003;14(7):362-9. [ Links ]

Lagarda MJ, García-Llatas G, Farré R. Analysis of phytosterols in foods. J Pharm Biomed Anal. 2006;41(5):1486- 96. [ Links ]

Novak A, Gutiérrez M, Doménech L, Suñé JM, Miñarro M, García E, et al. Development and validation of a simple high-performance liquid chromatography analytical method for simultaneous determination of phytosterols, cholesterol and squalene in parenteral lipid emulsions. Biomed Chromatogr. (pendiente de publicación, aceptado agosto 2017). [ Links ]

Xu Z, Harvey KA, Pavlina T, Dutot G, Hise M, Zaloga GP, et al. Steroidal compounds in commercial parenteral lipid emulsions. Nutrients. 2012;4(8):904-21. [ Links ]

Llop JM, Leiva E, Novak A, Sanmartí N, Jódar R, Suñé JM, et al. Selección de emulsiones lipídicas en nutrición parenteral: parámetros bioquímicos y metabólicos. Nutr Hosp. 2017;34:767-75. [ Links ]

Meisel JA, Le HD, De Meijer VE, Nose V, Gura KM, Mulkern RV, et al. Comparison of 5 intravenous lipid emulsions and their effects on hepatic steatosis in a murine model. J Pediat Surg. 2011;46(4): 666-73. [ Links ]

Forchielli ML, Bersani G, Tala S, Grossi G, Puggioli C, Masi M. The spectrum of plant and animal sterols in different oil-derived intravenous emulsions. Lipids. 2010;45(1): 63-71. [ Links ]

Savini S, D’Ascenzo R, Biagetti C, Serpentini G, Pompilio A, Bartoli A, et al. The effect of 5 intravenous lipid emulsions on plasma phytosterols in preterm infants receiving parenteral nutrition: A randomized clinical trial. Am J Clin Nutr. 2013;98(2):312-8. [ Links ]

Vanek VW, Seidner DL, Allen P, Bistrian B, Collier S, Gura K, et al. Update to ASPEN Position Paper: Clinical Role for Alternative Intravenous Fat Emulsions. Nutr Clin Pract. 2014;29(6):841. [ Links ]

Vanek VW, Seidner DL, Allen P. ASPEN position paper: clinical role for alternative intravenous fat emulsions. Nutr Clin Pract. 2012;27:150-92. [ Links ]

Xu Z, Harvey KA, Pavlina T. Steroidal compounds in commercial parenteral lipid emulsions Nutrients. 2012;4:904- 21. [ Links ]

Harvey K, Xu Z, Walker C. Parenteral lipid emulsions in Guinea pigs differentially influence plasma and tissue levels of fatty acids, squalene, cholesterol, and phytosterols. Lipids. 2014;49:777-93. [ Links ]

Fallon EM, Le HD, Puder M. Prevention of parenteral nutrition-associated liver disease: role of omega-3 fish oil. Curr Opin Organ Transplant. 2010;15:334-40. [ Links ]

Llop JM, Badía MB, Leiva E, Ramón JM. Parenteral fish oil and liver function test in hospitalized adult patientes receiving parenteral nutrition: A propensity scorematched analysis. Clinical Nutrition. 2017;36(4):1082-8. [ Links ]

Received: December 11, 2017; Accepted: February 01, 2018

Autor para correspondencia. Correo electrónico: josep.llop@bellvitgehospital.cat (Josep Manuel Llop Talaverón).

Conflicts of interests

No conflict of interest.

Creative Commons License This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License