The American journal of gastroenterology · 2024
Effectiveness of Bile Acid Sequestrants in Microscopic Colitis and Utility of Bile Acid Testing: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
Систематический обзорСтатьяМетаанализПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Tome June, Tariq Raseen, Chelf Cynthia J, Khanna Sahil, Pardi Darrell S
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: Bile acid sequestrants (BAS) are an option for microscopic colitis (MC) refractory or intolerant to budesonide. There are inconsistent data on the prevalence of bile acid malabsorption (BAM) and utility of bile acid testing in MC. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate these outcomes.
METHODS: A systematic search of randomized control trials and observational studies of adults with MC treated with BAS was conducted using MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane, and Scopus from inception to January 22, 2024. Data were extracted on (i) prevalence of BAM, (ii) clinical response and adverse events, and (iii) recurrence after BAS discontinuation. Data were pooled using random-effects models to determine weighted pooled estimates and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).
RESULTS: We included 23 studies (1 randomized control trial, 22 observational), with 1,011 patients with MC assessed for BAM and 771 treated with BAS. The pooled prevalence of BAM was 34% (95% CI 0.26-0.42, I2 = 81%). The pooled response rate with BAS induction for all patients with MC, irrespective of BAM, was 62% (95% CI 0.55-0.70, I2 = 71%). There was a higher pooled response rate in patients with BAM compared with those without BAM ( P < 0.0001). The pooled rate of BAS-related adverse effects was 9% (95% CI 0.05-0.14, I2 = 58%).
DISCUSSION: One-third of patients with MC had BAM, and almost two-thirds of all patients responded to BAS with limited side effects. Patients with MC and BAM were more likely to respond to therapy, supporting the value of bile acid testing.
METHODS: A systematic search of randomized control trials and observational studies of adults with MC treated with BAS was conducted using MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane, and Scopus from inception to January 22, 2024. Data were extracted on (i) prevalence of BAM, (ii) clinical response and adverse events, and (iii) recurrence after BAS discontinuation. Data were pooled using random-effects models to determine weighted pooled estimates and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).
RESULTS: We included 23 studies (1 randomized control trial, 22 observational), with 1,011 patients with MC assessed for BAM and 771 treated with BAS. The pooled prevalence of BAM was 34% (95% CI 0.26-0.42, I2 = 81%). The pooled response rate with BAS induction for all patients with MC, irrespective of BAM, was 62% (95% CI 0.55-0.70, I2 = 71%). There was a higher pooled response rate in patients with BAM compared with those without BAM ( P < 0.0001). The pooled rate of BAS-related adverse effects was 9% (95% CI 0.05-0.14, I2 = 58%).
DISCUSSION: One-third of patients with MC had BAM, and almost two-thirds of all patients responded to BAS with limited side effects. Patients with MC and BAM were more likely to respond to therapy, supporting the value of bile acid testing.