Endocrine · 2018
Liquid L-thyroxine versus tablet L-thyroxine in patients on L- thyroxine replacement or suppressive therapy: a meta-analysis.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяМетаанализОбзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Laurent Irakoze, Tang Siying, Astère Manirakiza, Wang Kan Ran, Deng Shuhua, Xiao Ling, Li Qi Fu
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To compare the effectiveness of liquid L-T4 (L-thyroxine) and tablet L-T4 in patients on L-T4 replacement or suppressive therapy.
METHODS: The Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science databases were searched to identify relevant articles. All prospective or randomized controlled studies (RCTs) comparing liquid L-T4 and tablet L-T4 in patients on L-T4 replacement or suppressive therapy were included in the analysis.
RESULTS: Overall, the initial search of the four databases identified 1278 published studies; of these, eight studies were ultimately included in the meta-analysis. TSH (thyroid stimulating hormone) levels were significantly suppressed in patients on liquid L-T4 compared with those on tablet L-T4, in patients on L-T4 suppressive therapy with L-T4 malabsorption (Mean Difference (MD) = -2.26, 95% Confidence Interval (CI): -3.59, -0.93; P = 0.0009)). However, liquid L-T4 and tablet L-T4 did not show a statistically significant difference in patients on L-T4 suppressive therapy without malabsorption (MD = 0.08, 95% CI: -0.31, 0.47; P = 0.69). TSH levels were significantly normalized in patients on liquid L-T4 compared with those on tablet L-T4, in Patients on L-T4 replacement therapy with L-T4 malabsorption (MD = -3.20, 95% CI: -5.08, -1.32; P = 0.0009). However, liquid L-T4 and tablet L-T4 did not show a statistically significant difference in patients on L-T4 replacement therapy without malabsorption (MD = 0.91, 95% CI: -0.03, 1.86; P = 0.06).
CONCLUSION: Liquid L-T4 is more efficient than tablet L-T4 in patients on L-T4 replacement or suppressive therapy with malabsorption. No significant differences were observed in patients without malabsorption. Further studies should be conducted to verify these findings.
METHODS: The Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science databases were searched to identify relevant articles. All prospective or randomized controlled studies (RCTs) comparing liquid L-T4 and tablet L-T4 in patients on L-T4 replacement or suppressive therapy were included in the analysis.
RESULTS: Overall, the initial search of the four databases identified 1278 published studies; of these, eight studies were ultimately included in the meta-analysis. TSH (thyroid stimulating hormone) levels were significantly suppressed in patients on liquid L-T4 compared with those on tablet L-T4, in patients on L-T4 suppressive therapy with L-T4 malabsorption (Mean Difference (MD) = -2.26, 95% Confidence Interval (CI): -3.59, -0.93; P = 0.0009)). However, liquid L-T4 and tablet L-T4 did not show a statistically significant difference in patients on L-T4 suppressive therapy without malabsorption (MD = 0.08, 95% CI: -0.31, 0.47; P = 0.69). TSH levels were significantly normalized in patients on liquid L-T4 compared with those on tablet L-T4, in Patients on L-T4 replacement therapy with L-T4 malabsorption (MD = -3.20, 95% CI: -5.08, -1.32; P = 0.0009). However, liquid L-T4 and tablet L-T4 did not show a statistically significant difference in patients on L-T4 replacement therapy without malabsorption (MD = 0.91, 95% CI: -0.03, 1.86; P = 0.06).
CONCLUSION: Liquid L-T4 is more efficient than tablet L-T4 in patients on L-T4 replacement or suppressive therapy with malabsorption. No significant differences were observed in patients without malabsorption. Further studies should be conducted to verify these findings.