4.8 Article

L-ornithine L-aspartate in bouts of overt hepatic encephalopathy

期刊

HEPATOLOGY
卷 67, 期 2, 页码 700-710

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/hep.29410

关键词

-

资金

  1. Dayanand Medical College and Hospital

向作者/读者索取更多资源

High-quality data on the efficacy of L-ornithine L-aspartate (LOLA) in patients with cirrhosis and bouts of overt hepatic encephalopathy (OHE) are missing. We evaluated the efficacy of intravenous LOLA in the reversal of bouts of OHE in patients with cirrhosis. In this prospective, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial conducted at two tertiary care institutes in India, 370 patients with cirrhosis and bouts of OHE were screened. After exclusion, 193 (52.16%) patients were randomized to receive either intravenous infusions of LOLA (n=98), 30g daily, or placebo (n=95) for 5 days. Standard of care treatment (including lactulose and ceftriaxone) was given in both groups. Randomization was done centrally (). All study personnel were blinded to the treatment assignment. Fasting venous ammonia levels were estimated daily from 0 to 5 days. Serum tumor necrosis factor-alpha, interleukins, hemogram, and liver and renal function tests were performed at days 0 and 5. Primary outcome was mental state grade at day 5 of treatment. The grade of OHE was significantly lower in the LOLA group (compared to placebo) on days 1-4 but not on day 5. The mean time taken for recovery was lower in the LOLA group compared to the placebo group (1.92 +/- 0.93 versus 2.50 +/- 1.03 days, P=0.002; 95% confidence interval -0.852 to -0.202). Venous ammonia at day 5 and length of hospital stay were significantly lower in the LOLA group. No significant difference in interleukins was seen between the groups. Conclusion: In patients with bouts of OHE, intravenous LOLA (as an add-on therapy to lactulose and ceftriaxone) significantly improves the grade of OHE over days 1-4, but not on day 5, and decreases venous ammonia, time of recovery, and length of hospital stay. (Hepatology 2018;67:700-710).

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

4.8
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