4.2 Review

Effects of Sodium Valproate Monotherapy on Blood Liver Enzyme Levels in Patients with Epilepsy: A Meta-Analysis

期刊

HORMONE AND METABOLIC RESEARCH
卷 53, 期 7, 页码 425-434

出版社

GEORG THIEME VERLAG KG
DOI: 10.1055/a-1517-6550

关键词

sodium valproate; epilepsy; therapy; liver enzymes

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The meta-analysis found that blood AST and GGT levels significantly increased in epileptic patients receiving VPA monotherapy, while elevated blood ALT levels were observed in Asian patients and those in the early stage of VPA treatment. However, caution is needed in interpreting these results due to the small number of included studies.
We conducted this meta-analysis to assess the effects of sodium valproate (VPA) monotherapy on blood liver enzymes in patients with epilepsy. PubMed, Web of Science, EBSCO, Cochrane Library, Wanfang, China national knowledge infrastructure databases were searched. Nine studies were included. Results showed: (1) The overall SMD for blood AST, ALT, and GGT levels of VPA monotherapy group versus control group were 0.70 (95% CI=0.31 to 1.09, Z=3.52, p=0.0004), 0.47 (95% CI=-0.01 to 0.95, Z=1.91, p=0.06), 0.44 (95% CI=0.29 to 0.60, Z=5.55, p<0.00001), respectively. (2) In subgroup meta-analysis, increased blood AST and GGT levels were observed in epileptic minors (AST: total SMD=0.85, 95% CI=0.40 to 1.30, Z=3.69, p=0.0002; GGT: total SMD=0.46, 95% CI=0.29 to 0.63, Z=5.25, p<0.00001). Elevated blood ALT level was observed in Asian patients receiving VPA monotherapy (total SMD=0.70, 95% CI=0.51 to 0.90, Z=7.01, p<0.00001), and the early stage of VPA monotherapy (total SMD=0.93, 95% CI=0.57 to 1.29, Z=5.09, p<0.00001). Overall, our results indicated that blood AST and GGT were significantly increased in epileptic minors receiving VPA monotherapy. The elevation of blood ALT was observed in Asian patients and the early stage of VPA monotherapy. However, due to the small number of included studies, our results should be considered with caution.

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

4.2
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