Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38550552›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical medicine research2024

Evaluation of Alternative Treatment Strategies for Bile Acid Malabsorption in Inflammatory Bowel Disease Patients: A Network Meta-Analysis.

Nooraldin Merza, Omar Saab, Yusuf Nawras, Roua Abdulhussein, Ahmed Elmoursi, Lena Daddoo, Zinah Yaqoob, Hiba Al Ani, Tamarah Al Hamdany, Ahmed Gadelmawla and 3 more

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical medicine research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Understanding the therapeutic toolkit for inflammatory bowel disease.Nature reviews. Gastroenterology & hepatology · 2025
    Review
  2. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors at 8 institutions in 3 countries.

Nooraldin MerzaDepartment of Internal Medicine, University of Toledo, Toledo, OH, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7198-1617
Omar SaabDepartment of Internal Medicine, Cleavland Clinic, Cleavland, OH, USA.
Yusuf NawrasUniversity of Toledo College of Medicine and Life Sciences, Toledo, OH, USA.
Roua AbdulhusseinDepartment fo Internal Medicine, Al Mustansiriyah University, Baghdad, Iraq.
Ahmed ElmoursiDepartment of Internal Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Lena DaddooDepartment of Internal Medicine, University of Baghdad, Baghdad, Iraq.
Zinah YaqoobDepartment of Internal medicine and College of Medicine, University of Diyala, Diyala, Iraq.
Hiba Al AniDepartment fo Internal Medicine, Al Mustansiriyah University, Baghdad, Iraq.
Tamarah Al HamdanyDepartment of Internal medicine, University of Michigan Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Ahmed GadelmawlaFaculty of Medicine, Menoufia University, Menoufia, Egypt.
Mohamed KhalilDepartment of Cardiology, Cairo University, Cairo, Egypt.
Mona HassanGastroenterology Department, University of Toledo, Toledo, OH, USA.
Abdallah KobeissyGastroenterology Department, University of Toledo, Toledo, OH, USA.
University of Toledo · USMustansiriyah University · IQUniversity of Baghdad · IQCairo University · EGHarvard University · USMenoufia University · EGUniversity of Diyala · IQUniversity of Michigan · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Bile acid malabsorption (BAM) is characterized by chronic watery diarrhea resulting from excessive bile acids in the feces. BAM is often an overlooked cause of chronic diarrhea, with its prevalence not being sufficiently researched. This review aimed to assess existing literature that explores diverse treatment strategies, to review the published studies that examine the various therapies for BAM patients, emphasizing their influence on clinical results. Methods: We conducted a comprehensive review of various databases, including PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Database, and EMBASE. Our criteria for inclusion focused on randomized controlled studies (RCTs) that evaluated the effectiveness of different treatment options for patients with BAM. To rank the treatments, we adopted the frequentist approach through the "netrank" function of the network meta-analysis (NMA). Moreover, we utilized the "netsplit" function in the NMA to separate direct and indirect evidence. Our analysis was carried out using RStudio version 1.4.1717 (2009 - 2021 RStudio, Inc.), and we used the "netmeta" and "meta" packages for NMA. Results: We found seven relevant articles involving 213 participants, the average age being approximately 50 years, including 53 males and 92 females. Of the drugs examined, tropifexor was proved to be the most effective in raising the fibroblast growth factor 19 (FGF19) levels and reducing the 7 alpha-hydroxy-4-cholesten-3-one (C4) levels, compared to the placebo (mean difference (MD) = 335.30, 95% confidence interval (CI) (334.86, 335.74), MD = -24.60, 95% CI (-25.37, -23.83); respectively). Compared to colesevelam and the placebo, liraglutide was more efficient in decreasing fecal bile acid concentration (liraglutide; MD = -19, 95% CI (-37.61, -0.39)). Conclusions: Tropifexor has been identified as the most successful medication in mitigating BAM symptoms. To ensure more accurate results, there is a need for randomized controlled clinical trials that involve a larger participant pool.

Indexed as

Bile acid diarrheaBile acid malabsorptionColesevelamColestyramineLiraglutideLoperamideNetwork meta-analysisTropifexor

Identifiers

PMID38550552
PMCPMC10970039
OpenAlexW4392879752

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.