SynthesisMedicine2021
Is rifaximin better than nonabsorbable disaccharides in hepatic encephalopathy?: A meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Preventive and therapeutic effects of rifaximin on hepatic encephalopathy with differential application dosages and strategies: a network meta-analysis.BMC gastroenterology · 2024Pooled it
- Rifaximin for prevention and treatment of hepatic encephalopathy in people with cirrhosis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023Pooled it
- Rifaximin-α use is associated with improved muscle mass in patients with cirrhosis.World journal of hepatology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe purpose of the present meta-analysis was to compare the efficacy of rifaximin and nonabsorbable disaccharides (NADs) in hepatic encephalopathy (HE).
methodsAfter the registration of the present meta-analysis on INPLASY, all procedures were performed according to PRISMA 2020. Relevant literature was retrieved on PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library up to September 5, 2021. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) was used to assess the quality of the enrolled studies, and Review Manager software (version 5.3) was used to analyze the clinical efficacy, blood ammonia and adverse effects.
resultsSix studies with 559 patients were included in the present meta-analysis. There were no significant differences in the basic characteristics of the included studies. Analysis of the complete resolution of HE showed that rifaximin was better than NADs (risk ratio [RR] = 1.87, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.03-3.39, P = .04). However, there were no significant differences in mental status (RR = 1.04, 95% CI = 0.92-1.18, P = .53), blood ammonia level (standard mean difference = -0.02, 95% CI = -0.40-0.02, P = .08), or drug adverse drug effects (OR = 0.43, 95% CI = 0.10-1.77, I2 = 56%, P = .24) between the rifaximin and NADs treatment groups.
conclusionRifaximin is not superior to NADs in the treatment of HE.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.