胆汁酸螯合剂治疗胆汁酸性腹泻的疗效:随机对照试验的元分析》。

IF 2.9 4区 医学
Giulia Almiron R Soares, Amanda Godoi, Patricia Marcolin, Gabriel Piredda, Estella Laia, Airton Zogaib Rodrigues
{"title":"胆汁酸螯合剂治疗胆汁酸性腹泻的疗效:随机对照试验的元分析》。","authors":"Giulia Almiron R Soares, Amanda Godoi, Patricia Marcolin, Gabriel Piredda, Estella Laia, Airton Zogaib Rodrigues","doi":"10.1002/jcph.6154","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Bile acid sequestrants (BASs) have often been used for bile acid diarrhea (BAD) but carry a high risk of adverse events. New generations of BASs show promising results; however, their efficacy remains unclear. This systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted using PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase to assess randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published up to November 2023 to retrieve studies that measured the parameters before and after the administration of BASs. The outcomes assessed were cessation or improvement in diarrhea, fecal consistency, abdominal cramping, frequency of diarrhea, and adverse events. Risk ratios (RRs) and mean differences with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were pooled using a random-effects model. Statistical analyses were conducted using RStudio version 4.1.2. The protocol was prospectively registered with PROSPERO (CRD42023445444). Seven RCTs with a total of 311 patients were included, of which 168 (54%) were randomized to BASs. Among BAS-treated patients, 101 (60.1%) received colesevelam, 40 (23.8%) received chenodeoxycholate, 18 (10.7%) received cholestyramine, and 9 (5.3%) received colestid. BASs were associated with a significant improvement in the cessation of diarrhea (RR 3.27; 95% CI 2.08 to 5.15; P ≤  .05) and liquid stool to normal fecal consistency (RR 2.69; 95% CI 1.56 to 4.65; P ≤  .05), as well as an increase in abdominal cramps (RR 5.27; 95% CI 1.21 to 22.93; P ≤  .05). There were no differences in urgency, adverse events, or nausea between groups. These findings indicate that BASs are effective in the treatment of BAD, as indicated by the improvement or cessation of diarrhea episodes.</p>","PeriodicalId":48908,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Pharmacology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Efficacy of Bile Acid Sequestrants in the Treatment of Bile Acid Diarrhea: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.\",\"authors\":\"Giulia Almiron R Soares, Amanda Godoi, Patricia Marcolin, Gabriel Piredda, Estella Laia, Airton Zogaib Rodrigues\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/jcph.6154\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Bile acid sequestrants (BASs) have often been used for bile acid diarrhea (BAD) but carry a high risk of adverse events. New generations of BASs show promising results; however, their efficacy remains unclear. This systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted using PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase to assess randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published up to November 2023 to retrieve studies that measured the parameters before and after the administration of BASs. The outcomes assessed were cessation or improvement in diarrhea, fecal consistency, abdominal cramping, frequency of diarrhea, and adverse events. Risk ratios (RRs) and mean differences with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were pooled using a random-effects model. Statistical analyses were conducted using RStudio version 4.1.2. The protocol was prospectively registered with PROSPERO (CRD42023445444). Seven RCTs with a total of 311 patients were included, of which 168 (54%) were randomized to BASs. Among BAS-treated patients, 101 (60.1%) received colesevelam, 40 (23.8%) received chenodeoxycholate, 18 (10.7%) received cholestyramine, and 9 (5.3%) received colestid. BASs were associated with a significant improvement in the cessation of diarrhea (RR 3.27; 95% CI 2.08 to 5.15; P ≤  .05) and liquid stool to normal fecal consistency (RR 2.69; 95% CI 1.56 to 4.65; P ≤  .05), as well as an increase in abdominal cramps (RR 5.27; 95% CI 1.21 to 22.93; P ≤  .05). There were no differences in urgency, adverse events, or nausea between groups. These findings indicate that BASs are effective in the treatment of BAD, as indicated by the improvement or cessation of diarrhea episodes.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48908,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Clinical Pharmacology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Clinical Pharmacology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/jcph.6154\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Pharmacology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jcph.6154","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

胆汁酸螯合剂(BAS)常用于治疗胆汁酸腹泻(BAD),但其不良反应风险较高。新一代胆汁酸螯合剂显示出良好的效果,但其疗效仍不明确。本系统综述和荟萃分析使用 PubMed、Cochrane 和 Embase 对截至 2023 年 11 月发表的随机对照试验 (RCT) 进行了评估,以检索测量 BAS 施用前后参数的研究。评估的结果包括腹泻、粪便稠度、腹部绞痛、腹泻频率和不良事件的停止或改善。采用随机效应模型对风险比 (RR) 和平均差异及 95% 置信区间 (CI) 进行汇总。统计分析使用 RStudio 4.1.2 版本进行。研究方案已在 PROSPERO(CRD42023445444)进行了前瞻性注册。共纳入了 7 项 RCT,共 311 名患者,其中 168 人(54%)随机接受了 BAS 治疗。在接受 BAS 治疗的患者中,101 人(60.1%)接受了可乐定治疗,40 人(23.8%)接受了去氧胆酸盐治疗,18 人(10.7%)接受了胆固醇治疗,9 人(5.3%)接受了可乐定治疗。在停止腹泻(RR 3.27;95% CI 2.08 至 5.15;P ≤ .05)和液状粪便变为正常粪便稠度(RR 2.69;95% CI 1.56 至 4.65;P ≤ .05)以及腹部绞痛加剧(RR 5.27;95% CI 1.21 至 22.93;P ≤ .05)方面,BASs 均有显著改善。不同组间在尿急、不良反应或恶心方面没有差异。这些研究结果表明,BASs 可有效治疗 BAD,腹泻症状的改善或停止即表明了这一点。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Efficacy of Bile Acid Sequestrants in the Treatment of Bile Acid Diarrhea: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Bile acid sequestrants (BASs) have often been used for bile acid diarrhea (BAD) but carry a high risk of adverse events. New generations of BASs show promising results; however, their efficacy remains unclear. This systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted using PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase to assess randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published up to November 2023 to retrieve studies that measured the parameters before and after the administration of BASs. The outcomes assessed were cessation or improvement in diarrhea, fecal consistency, abdominal cramping, frequency of diarrhea, and adverse events. Risk ratios (RRs) and mean differences with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were pooled using a random-effects model. Statistical analyses were conducted using RStudio version 4.1.2. The protocol was prospectively registered with PROSPERO (CRD42023445444). Seven RCTs with a total of 311 patients were included, of which 168 (54%) were randomized to BASs. Among BAS-treated patients, 101 (60.1%) received colesevelam, 40 (23.8%) received chenodeoxycholate, 18 (10.7%) received cholestyramine, and 9 (5.3%) received colestid. BASs were associated with a significant improvement in the cessation of diarrhea (RR 3.27; 95% CI 2.08 to 5.15; P ≤  .05) and liquid stool to normal fecal consistency (RR 2.69; 95% CI 1.56 to 4.65; P ≤  .05), as well as an increase in abdominal cramps (RR 5.27; 95% CI 1.21 to 22.93; P ≤  .05). There were no differences in urgency, adverse events, or nausea between groups. These findings indicate that BASs are effective in the treatment of BAD, as indicated by the improvement or cessation of diarrhea episodes.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Clinical Pharmacology
Journal of Clinical Pharmacology PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY-
自引率
3.40%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: The Journal of Clinical Pharmacology (JCP) is a Human Pharmacology journal designed to provide physicians, pharmacists, research scientists, regulatory scientists, drug developers and academic colleagues a forum to present research in all aspects of Clinical Pharmacology. This includes original research in pharmacokinetics, pharmacogenetics/pharmacogenomics, pharmacometrics, physiologic based pharmacokinetic modeling, drug interactions, therapeutic drug monitoring, regulatory sciences (including unique methods of data analysis), special population studies, drug development, pharmacovigilance, womens’ health, pediatric pharmacology, and pharmacodynamics. Additionally, JCP publishes review articles, commentaries and educational manuscripts. The Journal also serves as an instrument to disseminate Public Policy statements from the American College of Clinical Pharmacology.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信