Clinical features of patients with different types of acute drug-induced liver injury: A comparative analysis

Yu WANG; Lixia QIU; Zuopeng FAN; Jingjing SONG; Jing ZHANG; Yutao ZHAN

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1001-5256.2021.03.025

Volume 37 Issue 3

Mar. 2021

Turn off MathJax

Article Contents

Abstract

References

Article Navigation > Journal of Clinical Hepatology > 2021 > 37(3): 632-635

PDF( 1808 KB)

Clinical features of patients with different types of acute drug-induced liver injury: A comparative analysis

DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-5256.2021.03.025

1.
Department of Gastroenterology, Beijing Tongren Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing 100730, China
2.
Third Department of Liver Disease Center, Beijing YouAn Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing 100069, China

Received Date: 2020-10-21
Accepted Date: 2020-12-03
Published Date: 2021-03-20

Abstract

Abstract

Objective To investigate the clinical features of patients with different types of acute drug-induced liver injury (DILI) through a retrospective analysis. Methods Clinical data were collected from 790 patients who were diagnosed with acute DILI in Beijing YouAn Hospital and Beijing Tongren Hospital affiliated to Capital Medical University from December 2010 to March 2019, and according to the type of damaged target cell, the patients were divided into hepatocellular injury type group with 554 patients, cholestasis type group with 99 patients, and mixed type group with 137 patients. The patients were evaluated based on severity grade and score, clinical outcome, and Hy′s rule. An analysis of variance was used for comparison of normally distributed continuous data between three groups, and the least significant difference t-test was used for further comparison between two groups; the Kruskal-Wallis H test was used for comparison of non-normally distributed continuous data between groups. The chi-square test was used for comparison of categorical data between three groups. The Kruskal-Wallis H test was used for comparison of ranked data between three groups, and the Mann-Whitney U test was used for comparison between two groups. Results Most of the patients were female in all three groups, and the hepatocellular injury type group had a significantly higher proportion of female patients than the cholestasis type group (70.8% vs 54.5%, P < 0.05), and the cholestasis type group had a significantly lower proportion of female patients than the mixed type group (54.5% vs 54.7%, P < 0.05). There were 244 patients with grade 3 hepatocellular injury type DILI (244/554, 44.1%), 56 patients with grade 3 cholestasis type DILI (56/99, 56.6%), and 46 patients with grade 3 mixed type DILI (46/137, 33.6%), and there was a significant difference between the three groups (χ²=36.589, P < 0.05). Drugs inducing liver injury included traditional Chinese medicine, Western medicine, combination of traditional Chinese medicine and Western medicine, and other drugs, among which traditional Chinese medicine was the most common cause of liver injury. There was a significant difference in the outcome at discharge between the patients with different types (H=14.390, P=0.001). Compared with the cholestasis type group, the hepatocellular injury type group had a significantly higher cure rate and significantly lower uncured rate and mortality rate (all P < 0.05). Among the 554 patients with hepatocellular injury type DILI, 388 (70.0%) met Hy′s rule and 166 (30.0%) did not meet Hy′s rule, and there was a significant difference in clinical outcome between these two groups (U=38 372.0, P=0.033). Conclusion DILI is more common in women, and most patients have hepatocellular injury type DILI. Traditional Chinese medicine is the main cause of liver injury. There is a high proportion of patients with severe DILI among the patients with hepatocellular injury type or cholestasis type. DILI often has good prognosis with a relatively low mortality rate. Hy′s rule cannot predict the death of patients with acute DILI.
- Chemical and Drug Induced Liver Injury,
- Hepatocyte Injury,
- Cholestasis

FullText(HTML)

References(15)

References

[1]	Drug-induced Liver Disease Study Group, Chinese Society of Hepatology, Chinese Medical Association. Guidelines for the management of drug-induced liver injury[J]. J Clin Hepatol, 2015, 31(11): 1752-1769. (in Chinese) DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-5256.2015.11.002 中华医学会肝病学分会药物性肝病学组. 药物性肝损伤诊治指南[J]. 临床肝胆病杂志, 2015, 31(11): 1752-1769. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-5256.2015.11.002
[2]	SHEN T, LIU Y, SHANG J, et al. Incidence and etiology of drug-induced liver injury in Mainland China[J]. Gastroenterology, 2019, 156(8): 2230-2241. e11. DOI: 10.1053/j.gastro.2019.02.002
[3]	ROBLES-DIAZ M, LUCENA MI, KAPLOWITZ N, et al. Use of Hy's law and a new composite algorithm to predict acute liver failure in patients with drug-induced liver injury[J]. Gastroenterology, 2014, 147(1): 109-118. e5. DOI: 10.1053/j.gastro.2014.03.050
[4]	SGRO C, CLINARD F, OUAZIR K, et al. Incidence of drug-induced hepatic injuries: A French population-based study[J]. Hepatology, 2002, 36(2): 451-455. DOI: 10.1053/jhep.2002.34857
[5]	SUK KT, KIM DJ, KIM CH, et al. A prospective nationwide study of drug-induced liver injury in Korea[J]. Am J Gastroenterol, 2012, 107(9): 1380-1387. DOI: 10.1038/ajg.2012.138
[6]	BJÖRNSSON ES, BERGMANN OM, BJÖRNSSON HK, et al. Incidence, presentation, and outcomes in patients with drug-induced liver injury in the general population of Iceland[J]. Gastroenterology, 2013, 144(7): 1419-1425, 1425. e1-e3; quiz e19-e20. DOI: 10.1053/j.gastro.2013.02.006
[7]	HE TT, JING J, BAI ZF, et al. Constituent ratio and changing trend of non-infectious liver diseases in the fifith Medical Center of Chinese PLA General Hospital from 2002 to 2018[J]. J Clin Hepatol, 2020, 36(8): 1773-1777. (in Chinese) DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-5256.2020.08.019 何婷婷, 景婧, 柏兆方, 等. 解放军总医院第五医学中心2002年—2018年常见非感染性肝病构成比及变化趋势分析[J]. 临床肝胆病杂志, 2020, 36(8): 1773-1777. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-5256.2020.08.019
[8]	LUCENA MI, ANDRADE RJ, KAPLOWITZ N, et al. Phenotypic characterization of idiosyncratic drug-induced liver injury: The influence of age and sex[J]. Hepatology, 2009, 49(6): 2001-2009. DOI: 10.1002/hep.22895
[9]	AMACHER DE. Female gender as a susceptibility factor for drug-induced liver injury[J]. Hum Exp Toxicol, 2014, 33(9): 928-939. DOI: 10.1177/0960327113512860
[10]	LIU Y, ZHAN SP, SONG L, et al. Drug-induced liver injury: Clinical and etiologic features at a large tertiary teaching hospital in China[J]. Med Sci Monit, 2020, 26: e919435. http://www.researchgate.net/publication/338705120_Drug-Induced_Liver_Injury_Clinical_and_Etiologic_Features_at_a_Large_Tertiary_Teaching_Hospital_in_China
[11]	CHALASANI N, BONKOVSKY HL, FONTANA R, et al. Features and outcomes of 899 patients with drug-induced liver injury: The DILIN prospective study[J]. Gastroenterology, 2015, 148(7): 1340-1352. DOI: 10.1053/j.gastro.2015.03.006
[12]	TESCHKE R. Top-ranking drugs out of 3312 drug-induced liver injury cases evaluated by the Roussel Uclaf Causality Assessment Method[J]. Expert Opin Drug Metab Toxicol, 2018, 14(11): 1169-1187.
[13]	JIN XL, YANG ZB, ZHAN SH, et al. Influencing factor of liver dysfunction of inpatients of tuberculosis with initial treatment[J/CD]. Chin J Exp Clin Infect Dis (Electronic Edition), 2020, 14(5): 394-400. (in Chinese) 金小琳, 杨智彬, 詹淑华, 等. 1501例初治住院结核病患者肝功能异常的影响因素[J/CD]. 中华实验和临床感染病杂志(电子版), 2020, 14(5): 394-400.
[14]	ANDRADE RJ, LUCENA MI, FERNÁNDEZ MC, et al. Drug-induced liver injury: An analysis of 461 incidences submitted to the Spanish registry over a 10-year period[J]. Gastroenterology, 2005, 129(2): 512-521. DOI: 10.1016/j.gastro.2005.05.006
[15]	ALHADDAD O, ELSABAAWY M, ABDELSAMEEA E, et al. Presentations, causes and outcomes of drug-induced liver injury in Egypt[J]. Sci Rep, 2020, 10(1): 5124. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-61872-9

Relative Articles

Supplements(0)

Cited By

Cited by

Periodical cited type(7)

1.	吴雪娇，彭江丽，樊浩，王璐，陈洁，刘晖. 310例抗结核药物性肝损伤患者临床特点及预后影响因素分析. 昆明医科大学学报. 2024(03): 157-165 .
2.	张飞龙，杨东元，兰军. 不同种类药物致急性药物性肝损伤的特征及其严重程度的影响因素. 现代养生. 2023(01): 24-26 .
3.	裴素娟，郭锦辉，魏晓霞. 综合医院住院患者药物性肝损伤发生致病药物及影响肝损伤严重程度的因素分析. 实用肝脏病杂志. 2023(05): 670-673 .
4.	王丹，米喜梅，杜蕾，王欣，宋新亮. 飞行员疑似异维A酸软胶囊肝损伤1例. 空军航空医学. 2023(06): 571 .
5.	邵青，张晓红，权伟，戴尊孝，刘飞. 抗精神病药物引起的不良反应回顾性分析. 中国医药导报. 2021(14): 156-159 .
6.	蒲文，陈迹，胡珊珊，董红妮. 采用RUCAM量表评价万古霉素肝损伤及相关危险因素分析. 新疆医学. 2021(12): 1337-1340 .
7.	任慧琼，姚均迪，赵红信，鲁进宇，吴珑芝. 基于RUCAM评估量表的高龄老年药物性肝损伤162例临床分析. 肝脏. 2021(11): 1276-1278 .

Other cited types(3)

Proportional views

Proportional views

通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com

1.
沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院沈阳 110142

Tables(4)

Get Citation

PDF

XML

Article Metrics

Article views (695) PDF downloads(86)

Clinical features of patients with different types of acute drug-induced liver injury: A comparative analysis

DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-5256.2021.03.025