Minireviews
Copyright ©The Author(s) 2021.
World J Gastroenterol. Jun 14, 2021; 27(22): 3050-3063
Published online Jun 14, 2021. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v27.i22.3050
Table 4 Published studies using non-absorbable disaccharides for minimal hepatic encephalopathy treatment
Ref.
Study type
Follow-up (wk)
MHE diagnosis
Active treatment (s)
Objectives
Patients (n)
Main results/impact measures
No history of OHE1
Prasad et al[47], 2007Randomized212NCT-A/FCT-A, NCT-B/FCT-B, PCT, BDTLactulose vs no treatmentPsychometry31/30ITT analysis: Improvement in 20/31 (64.5%) vs 2/30 (6.7%); NNT:2
Horsmans et al[55], 1997Randomized, double-blind2 NCT, RTT.Lactulose vs lactose as placebo4,5Psychometry7/7Improvement in time on Psychometric test on lactulose group respect to basal values.7 Rate of improvement NCT: 5/7 (71.42%) vs 1/7 (14.28%); NNT:2
Sharma et al[50], 2008Randomized24NCT-A/FCT-A, NCT-B/FCT-B, P300ERPLactulose, probiotics, and lactulose + probiotics5Psychometry, P300ERP635/35/35Normalization in 17/31 (54.8%), 16/31 (51.6%), and 17/30 (56.6%) of MHE patients
Morgan et al[60], 1989Cross-over, randomized83EEG, NCT, DST, DCTLactulose vs lactitol4Psychometry14/14No differences between treatments in median change in psychometric time or scores
Possible history of OHE1
Dhiman et al[51], 2000Randomized212NCT-A/FCT-A, NCT-B /FCT-B, PCT, BDT.Lactulose vs no lactulose4MHE improvement14/12Improvement in 8/10 (80.0%) vs 0/8 (0.0%), P < 0.001)8
Wang et al[49], 2019Randomized28NCT-A, DSTLactulose vs no lactuloseMHE reversal67/31ITT analysis: 43/67 (64.2%) vs 7/31 (22.6%); NNT: 3PPS: 41/59 (69.5%) vs 6/28 (21.4%); NNT: 2