4.3 Article

Effects of ursodeoxycholic acid on splanchnic and systemic hemodynamics - A double-blind, cross-over, placebo-controlled study in healthy volunteers

期刊

DIGESTION
卷 61, 期 2, 页码 107-112

出版社

KARGER
DOI: 10.1159/000007742

关键词

Doppler ultrasound; echocardiography; gallbladder volume; postprandial hemodynamics; portal system drug effects; ursodeoxycholic acid

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background Recently, the beneficial effects of ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA) on the portal hypertensive state have been demonstrated in patients with primary biliary cirrhosis. However, it is not known whether UDCA has direct or indirect effects on the vascular smooth muscles in humans, thereby leading to a change in splanchnic or systemic hemodynamics. Aims: We therefore evaluated the hemodynamic effects of UDCA as to its established effect on gallbladder motility under fasting and postprandial conditions in healthy volunteers. Methods: In a double-blind, cross-over study of 20 healthy volunteers, placebo or UDCA (750 mg/d) were randomly administered over 4 weeks with an interim 4-week washout period. Portal blood flow, cardiac output and gallbladder motility were measured using echo-Doppler and b-mode sonography before and after placebo and verum, respectively. ECG, blood pressure, heart rate and blood chemistry were also measured. Results: UDCA did not significantly change fasting portal flow or meal-induced portal hyperemia. Both fasting and postprandial gallbladder volumes increased (26.5 +/- 6.0 vs. 40.7 +/- 13.8 ml, p < 0.05, and 11.2 +/- 6.2 vs. 14.8 +/- 6.7 ml, p < 0.05). Diastolic blood pressure decreased under UDCA (71.2 +/- 8.7 vs. 66.5 +/- 6.5 mm Hg, p < 0.05). Serum levels of chloride and gamma-glutamyltransferase decreased slightly, while alkaline phosphatase increased. Conclusions: UDCA affected systemic but not portal hemodynamics. The increase in gallbladder volume is obviously mediated by factors that do not influence the splanchnic vascular bed. Copyright (C) 2000 S. Karger AG, Basel.

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

4.3
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