4.4 Review

Treatment of Fatigue in Primary Biliary Cholangitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Journal

DIGESTIVE DISEASES AND SCIENCES
Volume 64, Issue 8, Pages 2338-2350

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10620-019-5457-5

Keywords

Primary biliary cirrhosis; Liver transplantation; Ursodeoxycholic acid; Weakness; Malaise

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background and AimsFatigue is the most common complication of primary biliary cholangitis (PBC) and can be debilitating. Numerous interventions have been trialed targeting several proposed mechanisms of PBC-associated fatigue. We sought to summarize and perform a meta-analysis to determine the efficacy of these interventions.MethodsA comprehensive database search was conducted from inception through March 27, 2018. The primary outcome was proportion of fatigued patients or reduction in degree of fatigue. Adverse events were a secondary outcome. We assessed studies for risk of bias, graded quality of evidence, and used meta-analysis to obtain overall effect by pooling studies of the same class.ResultsWe identified 16 studies evaluating ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA) (7), liver transplantation (2), serotonin reuptake inhibitors (2), colchicine (1), methotrexate (1), cyclosporine (1), modafinil (1), and obeticholic acid (1). On meta-analysis, UDCA was not associated with a reduction in risk of fatigue (RR=0.86, 95% CI 0.69-1.08, p=0.19, I-2=56.2%). While liver transplantation did reduce degree of fatigue (SMD -0.57, 95% CI -0.89 to -0.24, p=0.001, I-2=67.3%), fatigue did not return to baseline indicating the underlying cause may not be addressed.ConclusionsWhile there is some improvement in fatigue with liver transplantation, there is a lack of high-quality evidence supporting the efficacy of any other intervention in the treatment of PBC-related fatigue. Further research into the underlying pathophysiology may help guide future trials.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available