Skip to main content
. 2015 Nov 26;16(12):28126–28145. doi: 10.3390/ijms161226087

Table 7.

Comparison of the treatment outcome of lamivudine and entecavir in chronic hepatitis B with severe acute exacerbation.

Authors Design Treatment (Patient Number) HBV DNA (Log copies/mL) Mortality (%) p-Value Prognostic Factors
Cui et al. [70] Retrospective study ETV (33) 5.9 51.5% 0.72 Age
LMV (34) 5.9 50% cholinesterase
MELD score
Chen et al. [61] Retrospective study ETV (42) 6.4 51.5% 0.374 Bilirubin
LMV (30) 5.6 50% Cholesterol
Prothrombin activity MELD-Na score
Lai et al. [71]. Retrospective study ETV (93) 6.4 51.5% 0.680 Bilirubin
LMV (89) 5.6 50% Creatinine
Prothrombin time MELD score
Liu et al. [72] Retrospective study ETV (31) 6.2 0% 0.385 N/A
LMV (34) 7.0 3%
Zhang et al. [73] Retrospective study ETV (65) 7.0 21.5% 0.066 Gender
HBeAg(+)
MELD score
Child–Pugh scores
LMV (54) 7.2 35.2% Undetectable HBV at 30 days
Chen et al. [74] Retrospective study ETV (107) 6.5 21.2% 0.02 MELD score
LMV (215) 6.5 12.3% Ascites
Hepatic enceophalopathy
Wong et al. [75] Retrospective study ETV (36) 7.3 19% 0.010 Prothrombin time
LMV (117) 7.6 4% ETV treatment
Tsai et al. [76] Retrospective study ETV (40) 8.3 12.5% 0.035 Prothrombin time
LMV (59) 8.4 1.7% ETV treatment
Ye et al. [77] Meta-analysis ETV (423) N/A 6.4% NS N/A
LMV(450) 7.9%
Yu et al. [65] Meta-analysis ETV (192) N/A 36.4% 0.35 N/A
LMV (148) 40.5%

ETV: entecavir; LMV: lamivudine; MELD: the model for end-stage liver disease; HBeAg: hepatitis B e antigen; N/A: not analyzed; NS: non-significant.