ReviewCureus2024
Efficacy and Safety of Variable Treatment Options in the Prevention of Hepatic Encephalopathy: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.
Review in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- The role of systemic inflammation in hepatic encephalopathy: advances in inflammatory mechanisms, prevention and treatment research.Annals of medicine · 2026Review
- Real-World Setting of Efficacy and Safety of 3 Years of Rifaximin Administration in Japanese Patients with Hepatic Encephalopathy: A Multicenter Retrospective Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 3 institutions in 5 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
There are no guidelines for the most effective medication to reduce hepatic encephalopathy (HE) or the associated mortality. The purpose of this study is to determine the most effective possible treatment among the single treatment options or the combined treatment options for decreasing the morbidity and mortality of HE. We evaluated the outcomes by various parameters such as the quality of life, reduction in ammonia, all causes of mortality, adverse events, reversal of minimal HE, and development of overt HE. We systematically searched PubMed, Cochrane, Web of Science, and Scopus till the 19th of January 2023 for studies that assess various treatment options for HE. Data were extracted from eligible studies and pooled in a frequentist network meta-analysis as standardized mean difference (SMD) and their 95% confidence interval (CI) using the MetaInsight web-based tool. The Cochrane Tool was used to assess the randomized controlled trials' quality (RCT), while the NIH tool was used to assess the quality of the included cohort studies. Utilizing the R software, the network meta-analysis was conducted. In addition to a significant variation in cases of (Lactulose and Rifaximin) compared with Rifaximin (RR= 0.39, 95% CI [0.17; 0.89]), the results demonstrated a significantly lower incidence of overt HE in (Lactulose and Rifaximin) compared with placebo (RR=0.19, 95% CI [0.09; 0.40]). Most arms demonstrated a statistically significant reduction in the incidence of overt HE compared to albumin and placebo. The results also demonstrated a significant reduction in ammonia between L-ornithine-L-aspartate (LOLA) and probiotics (MD= -19.17, 95% CI [-38.01; -0.32]), as well as a significant difference in the incidence of LOLA compared to placebo (MD= -22.62, 95% CI [-39.16; -6.07]). This network meta-analysis has significant data for managing subclinical HE in people without a history of overt HE. Our analysis showed that (Lactulose and Rifaximin), followed by (Rifaximin and L-carnitine), followed by (Lactulose and Rifaximin with zinc) were the best combinations regarding overt HE. LOLA reduced ammonia best, followed by Nitazoxanide and finally Lactulose. (Lactulose and Nitazoxanide) have the least adverse effects, followed by (Rifaximin and L-carnitine), then Probiotics. Yet, all mortality outcomes and quality of life changes yielded no useful findings. Future studies like RCTs must be done to compare our therapies directly.
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.