4.4 Article

The effect of ursodeoxycholic acid in liver functional restoration of patients with obstructive jaundice after endoscopic treatment: a prospective, randomized, and controlled study

期刊

BMC SURGERY
卷 13, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

BIOMED CENTRAL LTD
DOI: 10.1186/1471-2482-13-38

关键词

Obstructive jaundice; Ursodeoxycholic acid; Treatment with ursodeoxycholic acid

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: In patients with obstructive jaundice, multi-organ dysfunction may develop. Methods/Design: This trial is a prospective, open-label, randomized, and controlled study with the objective to evaluate the effect of ursodeoxycholic acid in liver functional restoration in patients with obstructive jaundice after endoscopic treatment. The aim of this study is to evaluate the effect of ursodeoxycholic acid in liver functional restoration of patients with obstructive jaundice after endoscopic treatment. The hypothesis of this trial is that patients with obstructive jaundice, in which will be administered UDCA, in the early phase after endoscopic intervention will have better and faster functional restoration of the liver than patients in the control group. Patients with obstructive jaundice, randomly, will be divided into two groups: (A) test group in which will be administered ursodeoxycholic acid twenty-four hours after endoscopic procedure and will last fourteen days, and (B) control group. Serum-testing will include determination of bilirubin, alanine transaminase, aspartate transaminase, gama-glutamil transpeptidase, alkaline phosphatase, albumin, and cholesterol levels. These parameters will be determined one day prior endoscopic procedure, and on the third, fifth, seventh, tenth, twelfth and fourteenth days after endoscopic intervention. Discussion: This trial is a prospective, open-label, randomized, and controlled study to asses the effect of ursodeoxycholic acid in liver functional restoration of patients with obstructive jaundice in the early phase after endoscopic treatment.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据