Real-world experience with the diagnosis of bile acid malabsorption (BAM) using serum 7-alpha-C4 and 48-hour stool bile acids

G. Mendoza-Domínguez , Z.M. Garrido-Santos , C. Lau , R. Balbuena , A.D. Santana-Vargas , M. Schmulson-Wasserman
{"title":"Real-world experience with the diagnosis of bile acid malabsorption (BAM) using serum 7-alpha-C4 and 48-hour stool bile acids","authors":"G. Mendoza-Domínguez ,&nbsp;Z.M. Garrido-Santos ,&nbsp;C. Lau ,&nbsp;R. Balbuena ,&nbsp;A.D. Santana-Vargas ,&nbsp;M. Schmulson-Wasserman","doi":"10.1016/j.rgmxen.2025.05.002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction and aims</h3><div>Bile acid malabsorption (BAM) is responsible for 30% of cases of diarrhea-predominant irritable bowel syndrome (IBS-D) or functional diarrhea and 63.5% of cases of diarrhea following cholecystectomy. <sup>75</sup>SeHCAT is the gold standard diagnostic method but is unavailable in Mexico. Alternatively, primary bile acid (PBA) and total bile acid (TBA) determination in 48 h stools and 7αC4 measurement have been proposed as screening tests.</div></div><div><h3>Objective</h3><div>Our aim was to evaluate the experience with PBAs and/or TBAs and to determine whether 7αC4 is a good screening biomarker for BAM in clinical practice.</div></div><div><h3>Material and methods</h3><div>An ambispective study of patients with chronic diarrhea was conducted. BAM was considered present with 7αC4 &gt; 55 ng/mL (cost $420.00 USD), PBAs ≥ 9.8%, TBAs &gt; 2,337 μmol/48 h, or TBAs &gt; 1,000 μmol/48 h + PBAs &gt; 4% (TBAs + PBAs) ($405.00 USD). However, those tests must be shipped to the US for their analysis (total cost $825.00 USD). Data were compared using the chi-square test and Student’s t test, and Spearman’s Rho correlations were calculated.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>We analyzed 48 patients with 7αC4 (age: 58.4 ± 16.9, women: 54.2%). BAM was confirmed by 7αC4 in 12.5%, by PBAs in 38.9%; by TBAs in 5.5%, and by TBAs + PBAs in 16.7%. We found elevated 7αC4 in patients with high or normal PBA/TBA levels (correlation with TBAs: 0.542, p = 0.020; PBAs: -0.127, p = 0.605; TBAs + PBAs: -0.200, p = 0.426). Lastly, BAM identified by 7αC4 was more frequent in patients with previous cholecystectomy (22.7%) vs. those without (3.8%).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Our study confirms that 7αC4 correlates well with TBAs and is a good biomarker for BAM screening because it can be elevated, despite normal PBA/TBA levels. Additionally, it represents a 49% cost savings in BAM investigation.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":74705,"journal":{"name":"Revista de gastroenterologia de Mexico (English)","volume":"90 2","pages":"Pages 169-175"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista de gastroenterologia de Mexico (English)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2255534X25000398","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction and aims

Bile acid malabsorption (BAM) is responsible for 30% of cases of diarrhea-predominant irritable bowel syndrome (IBS-D) or functional diarrhea and 63.5% of cases of diarrhea following cholecystectomy. 75SeHCAT is the gold standard diagnostic method but is unavailable in Mexico. Alternatively, primary bile acid (PBA) and total bile acid (TBA) determination in 48 h stools and 7αC4 measurement have been proposed as screening tests.

Objective

Our aim was to evaluate the experience with PBAs and/or TBAs and to determine whether 7αC4 is a good screening biomarker for BAM in clinical practice.

Material and methods

An ambispective study of patients with chronic diarrhea was conducted. BAM was considered present with 7αC4 > 55 ng/mL (cost $420.00 USD), PBAs ≥ 9.8%, TBAs > 2,337 μmol/48 h, or TBAs > 1,000 μmol/48 h + PBAs > 4% (TBAs + PBAs) ($405.00 USD). However, those tests must be shipped to the US for their analysis (total cost $825.00 USD). Data were compared using the chi-square test and Student’s t test, and Spearman’s Rho correlations were calculated.

Results

We analyzed 48 patients with 7αC4 (age: 58.4 ± 16.9, women: 54.2%). BAM was confirmed by 7αC4 in 12.5%, by PBAs in 38.9%; by TBAs in 5.5%, and by TBAs + PBAs in 16.7%. We found elevated 7αC4 in patients with high or normal PBA/TBA levels (correlation with TBAs: 0.542, p = 0.020; PBAs: -0.127, p = 0.605; TBAs + PBAs: -0.200, p = 0.426). Lastly, BAM identified by 7αC4 was more frequent in patients with previous cholecystectomy (22.7%) vs. those without (3.8%).

Conclusions

Our study confirms that 7αC4 correlates well with TBAs and is a good biomarker for BAM screening because it can be elevated, despite normal PBA/TBA levels. Additionally, it represents a 49% cost savings in BAM investigation.
使用血清7- α - c4和48小时粪便胆汁酸诊断胆汁酸吸收不良(BAM)的实际经验。
介绍和目的:30%的腹泻型肠易激综合征(IBS-D)或功能性腹泻和63.5%的胆囊切除术后腹泻是由胆酸吸收不良(BAM)引起的。sehcat是金标准诊断方法,但在墨西哥没有。另外,48 h粪便中原发性胆汁酸(PBA)和总胆汁酸(TBA)的测定和7αC4的测定也被提议作为筛选试验。目的:我们的目的是评估PBAs和/或TBAs的经验,并确定7αC4在临床实践中是否是BAM的良好筛选生物标志物。材料与方法:对慢性腹泻患者进行双视角研究。BAM被认为存在7αC4 > 55 ng/mL(成本420.00美元),PBAs≥9.8%,TBAs > 2,337 μmol/48 h,或TBAs > 1,000 μmol/48 h + PBAs > 4% (TBAs + PBAs)(405.00美元)。但是,这些测试必须运往美国进行分析(总费用为825.00美元)。数据比较采用卡方检验和Student’st检验,计算Spearman’s Rho相关。结果:我们分析了48例7αC4患者(年龄:58.4±16.9,女性:54.2%)。7αC4和PBAs分别为12.5%和38.9%;TBAs和TBAs + PBAs的比例分别为5.5%和16.7%。我们发现PBA/TBA水平高或正常的患者中7αC4升高(与TBA相关:0.542,p = 0.020;PBAs: -0.127, p = 0.605;TBAs + PBAs: -0.200, p = 0.426)。最后,由7αC4识别的BAM在既往胆囊切除术患者中的发生率(22.7%)高于未行胆囊切除术患者(3.8%)。结论:我们的研究证实,7αC4与TBA有良好的相关性,是一个很好的BAM筛选的生物标志物,因为它可以在PBA/TBA正常水平下升高。此外,它还可以节省49%的BAM调查成本。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信