Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2016 Oct;95(40):e4949.
doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000004949.

Evaluating the effectiveness and safety of ursodeoxycholic acid in treatment of intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy: A meta-analysis (a prisma-compliant study)

Affiliations
Review

Evaluating the effectiveness and safety of ursodeoxycholic acid in treatment of intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy: A meta-analysis (a prisma-compliant study)

Xiang Kong et al. Medicine (Baltimore). 2016 Oct.

Erratum in

Abstract

Background: Intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy (ICP) is a specific pregnancy-related disorder without standard medical therapies. Ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA) is the most used medicine, but the efficacy and safety of UDCA remain uncertain. Several meta-analyses had been made to assess the effects of UDCA in ICP. However, the samples were not large enough to convince obstetricians to use UDCA. We conducted a meta-analysis to evaluate the effects and safety of UDCA in patients with ICP, which included only randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

Methods: Six databases were searched. The search terms were "ursodeoxycholicacid," "therapy," "management," "treatment," "intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy," "obstetric cholestasis," "recurrent jaundice of pregnancy," "pruritus gravidarum," "idiopathic jaundice of pregnancy," "intrahepatic jaundice of pregnancy," and "icterus gravidarum."Randomized controlled trials of UDCA versus control groups (included using other medicines) among patients with ICP were included. The primary outcomes were improved pruritus scores and liver function. Secondary outcomes were the maternal and fetal outcomes in patients with ICP.Data were extracted from included RCTs. The Mantel-Haenzel random-effects model or fixed-effects model was used for meta-analysis.

Results: A total of 12 RCTs involving 662 patients were included in the meta-analysis. In pooled analyses that compared UDCA with all controls, UDCA was associated with resolution of pruritus (risk ratio [RR], 1.68; 95% confidence interval [CI],1.12-2.52; P = 0.01),decrease of serum levels of alanine aminotransferase (ALT) (standardized mean difference (SMD), -1.36; 95% CI, -2.08 to -0.63; P <0.001), reduced serum levels of bile acid (SMD, -0.68; 95% CI, -1.15 to -0.20; P <0.001), fewer premature births (RR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.43-0.72; P <0.001),reduced fetal distress (RR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.49-0.94; P = 0.02), high Apgar scores at 5 minutes (RR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.24-0.82; P = 0.009), less frequent respiratory distress syndrome (RDS) (RR, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.13-0.86; P = 0.02), and fewer neonates in the intensive care unit (NICU) (RR, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.35-0.87; P <0.05), increased gestational age (SMD,0.44; 95% CI, 0.26-0.63; P <0.001), and birth weight (SMD, 0.21; 95% CI, 0.02-0.40; P = 0.03). There were no differences in meconium staining and intrauterine growth retardation (IUGR) between the groups (P >0.05). No trials reported adverse effects on mothers and fetuses except nausea and emesis.

Conclusion: UDCA is effective and safe to improve pruritus and liver function in ICP. UDCA also reduced adverse maternal and fetal outcomes in pregnant women with ICP.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flowchart of study selection.
Figure 2
Figure 2
“Risk of bias” graph: review authors’ judgements about each risk of bias item presented as percentages across all included studies (A), “risk of bias” summary: review authors’ judgements about each risk of bias item for each included study (B).
Figure 3
Figure 3
Forest plots of risk ratio for improvement of pruritus (A), serum ALT (B), bile acid (C), bilirubin (D), and caesarean section (E).
Figure 4
Figure 4
Forest plots of risk ratio for prematurity (A), fetal distress (B), Apgar scores <5 minutes (C), neonatal respiratory distress (D), NICU (E), gestational age (F), and birth weight (G).
Figure 4 (Continued)
Figure 4 (Continued)
Forest plots of risk ratio for prematurity (A), fetal distress (B), Apgar scores <5 minutes (C), neonatal respiratory distress (D), NICU (E), gestational age (F), and birth weight (G).

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Diken Z, Usta IM, Nassar AH. A clinical approach to intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy. Am J Perinatol 2014; 31:1–8. - PubMed
    1. Estiu MC, Monte MJ, Rivas L, et al. Effect of ursodeoxycholic acid treatment on the altered progesterone and bile acid homeostasis in the mother-placenta foetus trio during cholestasis of pregnancy. Br J Clin Phramacol 2015; 79:316–329. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Wei J, Wang H, Yang X, et al. Altered gene profile of placenta from women with intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2010; 281:801–810. - PubMed
    1. Lee NM, Brady CW. Liver disease in pregnancy. World J Gastroenterol 2009; 15:897–906. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Williamson C, Geenes V. Intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy. Obstet Gynecol 2014; 124:120–133. - PubMed

MeSH terms

Supplementary concepts