Clinical analysis of 202 patients with drug-induced liver injury
10.3760/cma.j.cn341190-20220811-00646
- VernacularTitle:药物性肝损伤202例临床特征分析
- Author:
Bo XU
1
;
Qinying WANG
Author Information
1. 山西医科大学第一医院感染病科，太原 030001
- Keywords:
Chemical and drug induced liver injury;
Disease attributes;
Alanine transaminase;
Aspartate aminotransferases;
Gamma-glutamyltransferase;
Alkaline phosphat
- From:
Chinese Journal of Primary Medicine and Pharmacy
2023;30(8):1189-1193
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective:To investigate the clinical characteristics of drug-induced liver injury and provide a theoretical basis for the prevention and treatment of drug-induced liver injury.Methods:The clinical data of 202 patients with complete information on drug-induced liver injury who received treatment in First Hospital of Shanxi Medical University from November 2018 to November 2021 were collected. The information including gender, age, type and name of drugs taken or exposed, clinical characteristics, autoantibodies, and liver function was statistically analyzed.Results:Among the 202 patients with drug-induced liver injury, 77 patients (38.1%) were male and 125 patients (61.9%) were female. Age distribution was mainly at > 40-60 years. There were 141 cases (69.8%) of hepatocellular type, 27 cases (13.4%) of cholestatic type, and 34 cases (16.8%) of mixed type. There were statistically significant differences in alanine aminotransferase, aspartate aminotransferase, γ-glutamine transferase, alkaline phosphatase, prothrombin time, international standardized ratio, and prothrombin activity between different clinical types ( H = 91.43, 58.65, 9.25, 32.69, 9.56, 8.19, 9.40, all P < 0.05). Among the 202 patients with drug-induced liver injury, severe liver injury occurred in the largest proportion of cases (40.6%). There was no significant difference in the disease severity between different clinical types ( P = 0.789). The top three types of drugs causing liver injury were traditional Chinese medicine [52.0% (105/202)], antineoplastic drugs [6.4% (13/202)], and antipsychotics [5.9% (12/202)]. The detection rate of autoantibodies in 202 patients with drug-induced liver injury was 29.7% (60/202). Conclusion:Drug-induced liver injury lacks specificity in clinical manifestations. A wide variety of drugs can cause liver injury. Clinicians should strengthen liver function monitoring in key populations. The proportion of patients with mixed-type liver failure is high, which should be taken seriously. When patients with drug-induced liver injury are positive for liver disease-related antibodies, clinicians should be vigilant about the possibility of drug-induced liver injury.
