Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16034975›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2005

Bile acids for liver-transplanted patients.

W Chen, C Gluud

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Bile acids for liver-transplanted patients.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2010
    Pooled it
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

W ChenCochrane Hepato-Biliary Group, Toronto General Hospital Eaton N 6 224, 200 Elisabeth St, Copenhagen University Hospital, Toronto Ontario, DK 2100 Copenhagen, Canada, M5G 2C4. wdchen@uhnres.utoronto.ca
C Gluud
Copenhagen University Hospital · DKToronto General Hospital · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLiver transplantation has become a widely accepted form of treatment for numerous end-stage liver diseases. Bile acids may decrease the degree of allograft rejection after liver transplantation by changing the expression of major histocompatibility complex class molecules in bile duct epithelium and central vein endothelium.

objectivesTo assess the beneficial and harmful effects of bile acids for liver-transplanted patients. SEARCH STRATEGY: We performed searches of the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Trials Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, and EMBASE to April 2003. We also searched The Chinese Biomedical Database to May 2002. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised clinical trials comparing any dose of bile acids or duration of treatment in liver-transplanted patients versus placebo, no intervention, or another intervention. We included randomised clinical trials irrespective of blinding, language, and publication status. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: W Chen extracted the data and C Gluud validated them. We evaluated the methodological quality of the trials from the method for generation of the allocation sequence, allocation concealment, double blinding, and follow-up. We used the intention-to-treat principle to perform meta-analyses and presented the outcomes as relative risk (RR) or weighted mean difference (WMD), both with 95% confidence intervals (CI). MAIN

resultsWe identified seven randomised trials (six evaluating ursodeoxycholic acid versus placebo or no intervention and one evaluating tauro-ursodeoxycholic acid versus no intervention) with a total of 335 liver-transplanted patients. The administration of bile acids began one day or more after liver transplantation. All patients received the standard triple-drug immunosuppressive regimen (steroids, azathioprine, and cyclosporine or tacrolimus) to suppress the allograft rejection response after liver transplantation. Bile acids did not significantly reduce all-cause mortality, mortality related to allograft rejection, retransplantation, acute cellular rejection, or number of patients with steroid-resistant rejection. Bile acids significantly reduced the number of patients who had chronic rejection in a fixed-effect model but not in a random-effects model. Bile acids were safe and well tolerated by liver-transplanted patients. AUTHORS'

conclusionsBile acids do not seem to have significant beneficial effects in liver-transplanted patients.

Indexed as

Liver TransplantationCholagogues and CholereticsGraft RejectionHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicTaurochenodeoxycholic AcidUrsodeoxycholic AcidCholagogues and CholereticsTaurochenodeoxycholic AcidUrsodeoxycholic Acidursodoxicoltaurine

Identifiers

PMID16034975
OpenAlexW4234343640

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.