日本語View as Markdown

Effects of hydrogen-rich water on blood uric acid in patients with hyperuricemia: A randomized placebo-controlled trial.

高尿酸血症患者における水素水摂取が血中尿酸値に及ぼす影響:無作為化プラセボ対照試験

human randomized controlled trial hydrogen-rich water positive

Abstract

A randomized, placebo-controlled trial enrolled 100 patients with hyperuricemia, divided into three groups: placebo (ordinary water, 3×330 mL/day), low-dose hydrogen-rich water (HRW; 2×330 mL HRW with H₂ ≥4.66 mg/L plus 1×330 mL ordinary water/day), and high-dose HRW (3×330 mL HRW/day), each for 8 weeks. Blood uric acid was measured at baseline, 4 weeks, and 8 weeks. After 8 weeks, the high-dose group showed a statistically significant decline in uric acid from 488.2±54.1 μmol/L to 446.8±57.1 μmol/L (p<0.05), with a greater magnitude of reduction compared to the low-dose group. No notable safety concerns were identified. These results suggest that sustained, higher-dose HRW consumption may offer a feasible approach to managing elevated uric acid levels.

Mechanism

The authors attribute the uric acid-lowering effect to the anti-inflammatory and metabolic-modulatory properties of dissolved molecular hydrogen, though the precise biochemical pathway was not investigated in this trial.

Bibliographic

Authors
Wu F, Ma J, Xue J, Jiang X, Liu J, Zhang JH, et al.
Journal
Heliyon
Year
2024 (2024-08-30)
PMID
39258191
DOI
10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e36401
PMC
PMC11385766

Tags

Delivery:水素水経口投与 Mechanism:抗酸化酵素 免疫調節 炎症抑制 酸化ストレス

Delivery context

Hydrogen-rich water is a low-risk delivery route, but the achievable systemic hydrogen dose is bounded. For clinical applications, inhalation is the most efficient route; inhalation, however, carries explosion risk, and concentration matters (empirical LFL of 10% applies to inhalation environments; high-concentration devices are documented in the Consumer Affairs Agency accident database and are not recommended).

Safety notes

Hydrogen-rich water is a low-risk delivery route, but the achievable systemic hydrogen dose is bounded. For clinical applications, inhalation is the most efficient route; inhalation, however, carries explosion risk, and concentration matters (empirical LFL of 10% applies to inhalation environments; high-concentration devices are documented in the Consumer Affairs Agency accident database and are not recommended).

See also:

Cite as: H2 Papers — PMID 39258191. https://h2-papers.org/en/papers/39258191
Source: PubMed PMID 39258191