Literature DB >> 8301033

Assessment of lidocaine metabolite formation in comparison with other quantitative liver function tests.

B Meyer-Wyss1, E Renner, H Luo, A Scholer.   

Abstract

In clinical practice, the seriousness of liver disease is assessed based on the combined information from clinical examination, routine biochemical tests, and liver histology. Recently, the assessment of hepatic lidocaine metabolism has been proposed as a quantitative liver function test offering valuable additional information. To evaluate whether this new liver function test reflects the combined clinical assessment, we prospectively measured lidocaine metabolism in 111 patients with well characterized liver disease. In addition, lidocaine test results were compared with the aminopyrine breath test and the galactose elimination capacity. Lidocaine (1 mg/kg) was injected i.v. and serum concentrations of its main metabolite monoethylglycinexylidide were determined after 15 min. The results varied widely and the means (+/- S.D.) were similar among patients with mild liver disease (46 +/- 23 ng/ml), but significantly (P < 0.05) lower among patients with Child class A cirrhosis (19 +/- 11 ng/ml) or Child class B or C cirrhosis (21 +/- 19 ng/ml). The [13C]aminopyrine breath test, however, gave a better discrimination among patients with increasing severity of liver disease than lidocaine metabolite formation. The galactose elimination capacity finally best separated patients with mild liver disease from those with cirrhosis. The correlations between any two of the different quantitative liver function tests were weak (R2 consistently < 0.2). We conclude that lidocaine metabolite formation, like other quantitative liver function tests that are based on the microsomal metabolism of model compounds, quantitates a very particular enzymatic reaction which may not be representative for the functional reserve of the entire organ.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1993        PMID: 8301033     DOI: 10.1016/s0168-8278(05)80186-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Hepatol        ISSN: 0168-8278            Impact factor:   25.083


  9 in total

1.  Lidocaine and monoethylglycinexylidide serum determinations to analyze liver function of cirrhotic patients after oral administration.

Authors:  A E Muñoz; C Miguez; M Rubio; M Bartellini; D Levi; A Podestá; V Niselman; R Terg
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  1999-04       Impact factor: 3.199

2.  Parameters of microsomal and cytosolic liver function but not of liver perfusion predict portal vein velocity in noncirrhotic patients with chronic hepatitis C.

Authors:  C Herold; P Berg; D Kupfal; D Becker; D Schuppan; E G Hahn; H T Schneider
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2000-11       Impact factor: 3.199

3.  Comparison of MEGX (monoethylglycinexylidide) and antipyrine tests in patients with liver cirrhosis.

Authors:  J Wojcicki; K Kozlowski; M Drozdzik; M Wojcicki
Journal:  Eur J Drug Metab Pharmacokinet       Date:  2002 Oct-Dec       Impact factor: 2.441

Review 4.  Effect of hepatic insufficiency on pharmacokinetics and drug dosing.

Authors:  R K Verbeeck; Y Horsmans
Journal:  Pharm World Sci       Date:  1998-10

Review 5.  Pharmacokinetics and dosage adjustment in patients with hepatic dysfunction.

Authors:  Roger K Verbeeck
Journal:  Eur J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2008-09-02       Impact factor: 2.953

6.  Pharmacokinetics of lidocaine and its major metabolite- monoethylglycinexylidide (MEGX) in rabbits with experimental common bile duct obstruction.

Authors:  J Wójcicki; T Sulikowski; M Wójcicki; M Droździk; B Gawrońska-Szklarz; B Barcew-Wiszniewska; J Skowron; L Rózewicka; U Gołdyn
Journal:  Eur J Drug Metab Pharmacokinet       Date:  1995 Apr-Jun       Impact factor: 2.441

Review 7.  Clinical pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic considerations in patients with liver disease. An update.

Authors:  D J Morgan; A J McLean
Journal:  Clin Pharmacokinet       Date:  1995-11       Impact factor: 6.447

8.  Can quantitative tests of liver function discriminate between different etiologies of liver cirrhosis?

Authors:  Christoph Herold; Sabine Regn; Marion Ganslmayer; Matthias Ocker; Eckhart G Hahn; Detlef Schuppan
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2002-12       Impact factor: 3.199

9.  Prognostic value of generation of growth hormone-stimulated insulin-like growth factor-I (IGF-I) and its binding protein-3 in patients with compensated and decompensated liver cirrhosis.

Authors:  N Assy; Z Hochberg; R Enat; Y Baruch
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  1998-06       Impact factor: 3.199

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.