De 2002.

Methods	Double‐blind, parallel‐arm, single‐centre, randomised clinical trial evaluating primary and secondary prevention
Participants	36 participants with cirrhosis and endoscopically verified varices with 1 previous bleeding episode in the 7 to 10 days before inclusion, or without previous bleeding Proportion of men: carvedilol 83%; propranolol 94% Mean age: carvedilol 42.3 years; propranolol 47.3 years Proportion for primary prevention: carvedilol 61.1%; propranolol 61.1% Proportion with: alcohol‐related cirrhosis: carvedilol 28%; propranolol 56% hepatitis B‐related cirrhosis: carvedilol 39%; propranolol 22% hepatitis C‐related cirrhosis: carvedilol 11%; propranolol 6% large varices: carvedilol 100%; propranolol 100% carvedilol: grade 3 89%; grade 4 11% propranolol: grade 3 83%; grade 4 17% previous bleeding: carvedilol 39%; propranolol 39% ascites: carvedilol 67%; propranolol 89%
Interventions	Intervention comparison: carvedilol vs propranolol Dose of carvedilol: 12.5 mg once daily Dose of propranolol: 80 mg once daily Treatment duration: 7 days
Outcomes	Outcomes included in meta‐analysis: mortality, variceal bleeding, adverse events, reduction in hepatic venous pressure gradient, treatment response (gradient reduction by ≥ 20% from baseline or to ≤ 12 mmHg) assessed, after 7 days
Country of origin	India
Publication status	Full‐paper
Inclusion period	Not reported
Notes	Outcome data were not available by type of prevention
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Low risk	Drawing of lots (independent researcher not otherwise involved in the trial)
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Low risk	Serially numbered, opaque, sealed envelopes
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	Low risk	Blinding of participants and personnel
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	Low risk	Blinded outcome assessment
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	High risk	The investigators only report per protocol analyses of haemodynamic changes.
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Low risk	Clinically relevant outcomes are described. We did not have access to the trial protocol.
For‐profit funding	High risk	Support from ICI Pharmaceuticals India Ltd, India (supplied propranolol) and Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd, India (supplied carvedilol).
Other bias	Low risk	No other biases
Overall bias assessment (mortality)	High risk	High risk of bias
Overall bias assessment (non‐mortality outcomes)	High risk	High risk of bias