Suppr超能文献

熊去氧胆酸用于原发性胆汁性肝硬化。

Ursodeoxycholic acid for primary biliary cirrhosis.

作者信息

Rudic Jelena S, Poropat Goran, Krstic Miodrag N, Bjelakovic Goran, Gluud Christian

机构信息

Department of Hepatology, Clinic of Gastroenterology, Clinical Centre of Serbia, Belgrade, Serbia.

出版信息

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012 Dec 12;12(12):CD000551. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD000551.pub3.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Ursodeoxycholic acid is administered to patients with primary biliary cirrhosis, a chronic progressive inflammatory autoimmune-mediated liver disease with unknown aetiology. Despite its controversial effects, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has approved its usage for primary biliary cirrhosis.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the beneficial and harmful effects of ursodeoxycholic acid in patients with primary biliary cirrhosis.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched for eligible randomised trials in The Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science Citation Index Expanded, LILACS, Clinicaltrials.gov, and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform. The literature search was performed until January 2012.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised clinical trials assessing the beneficial and harmful effects of ursodeoxycholic acid versus placebo or 'no intervention' in patients with primary biliary cirrhosis.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently extracted data. Continuous data were analysed using mean difference (MD) and standardised mean difference (SMD). Dichotomous data were analysed using risk ratio (RR). Meta-analyses were conducted using both a random-effects model and a fixed-effect model, with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Random-effects model meta-regression was used to assess the effects of covariates across the trials. Trial sequential analysis was used to assess risk of random errors (play of chance). Risks of bias (systematic error) in the included trials were assessed according to Cochrane methodology bias domains.

MAIN RESULTS

Sixteen randomised clinical trials with 1447 patients with primary biliary cirrhosis were included. One trial had low risk of bias, and the remaining fifteen had high risk of bias. Fourteen trials compared ursodeoxycholic acid with placebo and two trials compared ursodeoxycholic acid with 'no intervention'. The percentage of patients with advanced primary biliary cirrhosis at baseline varied from 15% to 83%, with a median of 51%. The duration of the trials varied from 3 to 92 months, with a median of 24 months. The results showed no significant difference in effect between ursodeoxycholic acid and placebo or 'no intervention' on all-cause mortality (45/699 (6.4%) versus 46/692 (6.6%); RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.42, I² = 0%; 14 trials); on all-cause mortality or liver transplantation (86/713 (12.1%) versus 89/706 (12.6%); RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.25, I² = 15%; 15 trials); on serious adverse events (94/695 (13.5%) versus 107/687 (15.6%); RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.12, I² = 23%; 14 trials); or on non-serious adverse events (27/643 (4.2%) versus 18/634 (2.8%); RR 1.46, 95% CI 0.83 to 2.56, I² = 0%; 12 trials). The random-effects model meta-regression showed that the risk of bias of the trials, disease severity of patients at entry, ursodeoxycholic acid dosage, and trial duration were not significantly associated with the intervention effects on all-cause mortality, or on all-cause mortality or liver transplantation. Ursodeoxycholic acid did not influence the number of patients with pruritus (168/321 (52.3%) versus 166/309 (53.7%); RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.09, I² = 0%; 6 trials) or with fatigue (170/252 (64.9%) versus 174/244 (71.3%); RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.00, I² = 62%; 4 trials). Two trials reported the number of patients with jaundice and showed a significant effect of ursodeoxycholic acid versus placebo or no intervention in a fixed-effect meta-analysis (5/99 (5.1%) versus 15/99 (15.2%); RR 0.35, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.90, I² = 51%; 2 trials). The result was not supported by the random-effects meta-analysis (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.06 to 4.95). Portal pressure, varices, bleeding varices, ascites, and hepatic encephalopathy were not significantly affected by ursodeoxycholic acid. Ursodeoxycholic acid significantly decreased serum bilirubin concentration (MD -8.69 µmol/l, 95% CI -13.90 to -3.48, I² = 0%; 881 patients; 9 trials) and activity of serum alkaline phosphatases (MD -257.09 U/L, 95% CI -306.25 to -207.92, I² = 0%; 754 patients, 9 trials) compared with placebo or no intervention. These results were supported by trial sequential analysis. Ursodeoxycholic acid also seemed to improve serum levels of gamma-glutamyltransferase, aminotransferases, total cholesterol, and plasma immunoglobulin M concentration. Ursodeoxycholic acid seemed to have a beneficial effect on worsening of histological stage (random; 66/281 (23.5%) versus 103/270 (38.2%); RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.88, I² = 35%; 7 trials).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review did not demonstrate any significant benefits of ursodeoxycholic acid on all-cause mortality, all-cause mortality or liver transplantation, pruritus, or fatigue in patients with primary biliary cirrhosis. Ursodeoxycholic acid seemed to have a beneficial effect on liver biochemistry measures and on histological progression compared with the control group. All but one of the included trials had high risk of bias, and there are risks of outcome reporting bias and risks of random errors as well. Randomised trials with low risk of bias and low risks of random errors examining the effects of ursodeoxycholic acid for primary biliary cirrhosis are needed.

摘要

背景

熊去氧胆酸用于原发性胆汁性肝硬化患者,这是一种病因不明的慢性进行性炎症性自身免疫介导的肝病。尽管其效果存在争议,但美国食品药品监督管理局已批准其用于原发性胆汁性肝硬化。

目的

评估熊去氧胆酸对原发性胆汁性肝硬化患者的有益和有害作用。

检索方法

我们在Cochrane肝胆组对照试验注册库、Cochrane图书馆中的Cochrane系统评价对照试验中心注册库(CENTRAL)、MEDLINE、EMBASE、科学引文索引扩展版、拉丁美洲和加勒比卫生科学数据库、Clinicaltrials.gov以及世界卫生组织国际临床试验注册平台中检索符合条件的随机试验。文献检索截至2012年1月。

选择标准

评估熊去氧胆酸与安慰剂或“无干预”相比对原发性胆汁性肝硬化患者有益和有害作用的随机临床试验。

数据收集与分析

两位作者独立提取数据。连续数据采用均值差(MD)和标准化均值差(SMD)进行分析。二分数据采用风险比(RR)进行分析。采用随机效应模型和固定效应模型进行Meta分析,并给出95%置信区间(CI)。采用随机效应模型Meta回归评估各试验中协变量的影响。采用试验序贯分析评估随机误差(机遇作用)风险。根据Cochrane方法学偏倚领域评估纳入试验中的偏倚风险(系统误差)。

主要结果

纳入了16项随机临床试验,共1447例原发性胆汁性肝硬化患者。1项试验偏倚风险低,其余15项试验偏倚风险高。14项试验将熊去氧胆酸与安慰剂进行比较,2项试验将熊去氧胆酸与“无干预”进行比较。基线时晚期原发性胆汁性肝硬化患者的比例从15%到83%不等,中位数为51%。试验持续时间从3个月到92个月不等,中位数为24个月。结果显示,熊去氧胆酸与安慰剂或“无干预”在全因死亡率(45/699(6.4%)对46/692(6.6%);RR 0.97,95%CI 0.67至1.42,I² = 0%;14项试验)、全因死亡率或肝移植(86/713(12.1%)对89/706(12.6%);RR 0.96,95%CI 0.74至1.25,I² = 15%;15项试验)、严重不良事件(94/695(13.5%)对107/687(15.6%);RR 0.87,95%CI 0.68至1.12,I² = 23%;14项试验)或非严重不良事件(27/643(4.2%)对18/634(2.8%);RR 1.46,95%CI 0.83至2.56,I² = 0%;12项试验)方面的效果无显著差异。随机效应模型Meta回归显示,试验的偏倚风险、入组时患者的疾病严重程度、熊去氧胆酸剂量和试验持续时间与全因死亡率或全因死亡率或肝移植的干预效果无显著相关性。熊去氧胆酸对瘙痒患者数量(168/321(52.3%)对166/309(53.7%);RR 0.96,95%CI 0.84至1.09,I² = 0%;6项试验)或疲劳患者数量(170/252(64.9%)对174/244(71.3%);RR 0.90,95%CI 0.81至1.00,I² = 62%;4项试验)无影响。两项试验报告了黄疸患者数量,在固定效应Meta分析中显示熊去氧胆酸与安慰剂或无干预相比有显著效果(5/99(5.1%)对15/99(15.2%);RR 0.35,95%CI 0.14至0.90,I² = 51%;2项试验)。随机效应Meta分析未支持该结果(RR 0.56,95%CI 0.06至4.95)。门静脉压力、静脉曲张、曲张静脉出血、腹水和肝性脑病未受熊去氧胆酸显著影响。与安慰剂或无干预相比,熊去氧胆酸显著降低血清胆红素浓度(MD -8.69 µmol/l,95%CI -13.90至 -3.48,I² = 0%;881例患者;9项试验)和血清碱性磷酸酶活性(MD -257.09 U/L,95%CI -306.25至 -207.92,I² = 0%;754例患者,9项试验)。这些结果得到试验序贯分析的支持。熊去氧胆酸似乎还能改善γ-谷氨酰转移酶、转氨酶、总胆固醇和血浆免疫球蛋白M浓度的血清水平。熊去氧胆酸似乎对组织学分期恶化有有益作用(随机;66/281(23.5%)对103/270(38.2%);RR 0.62,95%CI 0.44至0.88,I² = 35%;7项试验)。

作者结论

本系统评价未证明熊去氧胆酸对原发性胆汁性肝硬化患者的全因死亡率、全因死亡率或肝移植、瘙痒或疲劳有任何显著益处。与对照组相比,熊去氧胆酸似乎对肝脏生化指标和组织学进展有有益作用。纳入的试验除1项外均有高偏倚风险,且存在结果报告偏倚风险和随机误差风险。需要开展偏倚风险低且随机误差风险低的随机试验来研究熊去氧胆酸对原发性胆汁性肝硬化的影响。

相似文献

1
Ursodeoxycholic acid for primary biliary cirrhosis.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012 Dec 12;12(12):CD000551. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD000551.pub3.
2
Bezafibrate for primary biliary cirrhosis.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012 Jan 18;1(1):CD009145. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD009145.pub2.
3
Bisphosphonates for osteoporosis in primary biliary cirrhosis.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011 Dec 7(12):CD009144. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD009144.pub2.
4
Pharmacological interventions for primary biliary cholangitis: an attempted network meta-analysis.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Mar 28;3(3):CD011648. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011648.pub2.
5
Ursodeoxycholic acid for primary biliary cirrhosis.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2008 Jul 16(3):CD000551. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD000551.pub2.
6
L-ornithine L-aspartate for prevention and treatment of hepatic encephalopathy in people with cirrhosis.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 May 15;5(5):CD012410. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012410.pub2.
7
Vitamin D supplementation for chronic liver diseases in adults.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Nov 3;11(11):CD011564. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011564.pub2.
8
Direct-acting antivirals for chronic hepatitis C.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Jun 6;6(6):CD012143. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012143.pub2.
9
Direct-acting antivirals for chronic hepatitis C.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Sep 18;9(9):CD012143. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012143.pub3.
10
Nutritional support for liver disease.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012 May 16;2012(5):CD008344. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD008344.pub2.

引用本文的文献

4
Fecal Bile Acids in Canine Chronic Liver Disease: Results from 46 Dogs.
Animals (Basel). 2024 Oct 22;14(21):3051. doi: 10.3390/ani14213051.
5
[Symptom perception and coping in patients with primary biliary cholangitis: a qualitative study in the context of SOMA.LIV].
Psychother Psychosom Med Psychol. 2025 Jan;75(1):20-27. doi: 10.1055/a-2434-6837. Epub 2024 Oct 30.
6
Current Landscape and Evolving Therapies for Primary Biliary Cholangitis.
Cells. 2024 Sep 19;13(18):1580. doi: 10.3390/cells13181580.
7
The treatment of primary biliary cholangitis: from shadow to light.
Therap Adv Gastroenterol. 2024 Jul 29;17:17562848241265782. doi: 10.1177/17562848241265782. eCollection 2024.
9
Ursodeoxycholic Acid Use After Bariatric Surgery: Effects on Metabolic and Inflammatory Blood Markers.
Obes Surg. 2023 Jun;33(6):1773-1781. doi: 10.1007/s11695-023-06581-8. Epub 2023 Apr 25.
10
Efficacy and safety of ursodeoxycholic acid in children with cholestasis: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
PLoS One. 2023 Jan 31;18(1):e0280691. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0280691. eCollection 2023.

本文引用的文献

1
Influence of reported study design characteristics on intervention effect estimates from randomized, controlled trials.
Ann Intern Med. 2012 Sep 18;157(6):429-38. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-157-6-201209180-00537.
3
Primary biliary cirrhosis: a 2010 update.
J Hepatol. 2010 May;52(5):745-58. doi: 10.1016/j.jhep.2009.11.027. Epub 2010 Feb 18.
4
Estimating required information size by quantifying diversity in random-effects model meta-analyses.
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2009 Dec 30;9:86. doi: 10.1186/1471-2288-9-86.
5
EASL Clinical Practice Guidelines: management of cholestatic liver diseases.
J Hepatol. 2009 Aug;51(2):237-67. doi: 10.1016/j.jhep.2009.04.009. Epub 2009 Jun 6.
6
Can trial sequential monitoring boundaries reduce spurious inferences from meta-analyses?
Int J Epidemiol. 2009 Feb;38(1):276-86. doi: 10.1093/ije/dyn179. Epub 2008 Sep 29.
7
Ursodeoxycholic acid for primary biliary cirrhosis.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2008 Jul 16(3):CD000551. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD000551.pub2.
8
Trial sequential analysis reveals insufficient information size and potentially false positive results in many meta-analyses.
J Clin Epidemiol. 2008 Aug;61(8):763-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2007.10.007. Epub 2008 Apr 14.
10
Xanthomatous biliary cirrhosis; a clinical syndrome.
Ann Intern Med. 1949 Jan;30(1):121-79. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-30-1-121.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验