Skip to main content
NCBI home page
PLOS One logoLink to PLOS One
. 2022 Apr 26;17(4):e0267647. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0267647

Combination therapy with rifaximin and lactulose in hepatic encephalopathy: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Jian Fu 1,*,#, Yi Gao 1,#, Li Shi 1,#
Editor: Peter Starkel2
PMCID: PMC9041837  PMID: 35471992

Abstract

Rifaximin and lactulose are widely used in patients with hepatic encephalopathy (HE); however, data on whether the combined use of rifaximin and lactulose could yield additional benefits for patients with HE are limited and inconclusive. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to determine the treatment effectiveness of rifaximin plus lactulose versus lactulose alone in patients with HE. Electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure) were searched for eligible RCTs from their inception until November 2020. Relative risks (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were applied to calculate pooled effect estimates for the treatment effectiveness of rifaximin plus lactulose versus lactulose alone by using the random-effects model. Sensitivity, subgroup, and publication bias analyses were also performed. We included 7 RCTs enrolling 843 patients with HE. We noted that the use of rifaximin plus lactulose was associated with an increased incidence of effective rate than lactulose alone (RR, 1.30; 95% CI, 1.10–1.53; P = 0.002). Moreover, the use of rifaximin plus lactulose was associated with a reduced risk of mortality as compared with lactulose alone (RR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.41–0.80; P = 0.001). This study found that the use of rifaximin in combination with lactulose could provide additional benefits in terms of increased effective rate and decreased mortality than lactulose alone in patients with HE.

Introduction

Hepatic encephalopathy (HE) is induced by metabolic disorders which cause severe liver disease and lead to the dysfunction of the central nervous system [1, 2]. The main clinical manifestations of HE include disturbances of consciousness, behavioral disorders, and coma [3]. Compared with variceal bleeding and ascites, HE alone is associated with the worst outcome, with reported 1-year mortality as high as 64%, which confers a damning prognosis [4]. Even in its subclinical or covert state, it triggers a profound negative impact on the functional capability and quality of life of both patients and their caregivers [5, 6]. The prevalence of HE is relatively high, and should be considered a common complication of severe liver disease, including hepatitis caused by a variety of viruses, cirrhosis, and liver cancer [7]. Nowadays, the mechanisms of HE pathogenesis include ammonia poisoning, inflammatory response to injury, amino acid imbalance, and pseudo neurotransmitter replace normal neurotransmitter [8–11]. HE is regarded as an important predictor associated with poor prognosis [12]. Therefore, improving HE is of great importance in clinical practice to improve patient prognosis.

Nonabsorbable disaccharides are considered as the first-line treatment option for patients with HE. Lactulose reduces the concentration of aminogenic substrates in the intestinal lumen and pH in the colon through the production of organic acids by bacterial fermentation, and the osmotic cathartic mechanism [13, 14]. Rifaximin, an oral antimicrobial agent, was approved for the prevention and treatment of HE by the US Food and Drug Administration in 2010 [15]. Rifaximin should be used in combination with lactulose as a treatment strategy in patients with HE [16]. However, it remains unclear whether the combined use rifaximin and lactulose could provide additional benefits over lactulose alone in patients with HE. Therefore, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to assess the effectiveness of rifaximin plus lactulose versus lactulose alone in patients with HE.

Materials and methods

Data sources, search strategy, and selection criteria

This study was conducted and the results reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines [17]. We included RCTs comparing the effectiveness of rifaximin plus lactulose versus lactulose alone in patients with HE. No restrictions were placed on publication language and status. We systematically searched the following databases: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure from their inception throughout November 2020, and the following search terms were used as the Medical Subject Heading and text words: “hepatic encephalopathy,” “rifaximin,” and “lactulose.” We also manually searched the reference lists of retrieved studies to identify any other studies that met the inclusion criteria.

Two reviewers independently conducted the literature search and study selection, and any disagreement was resolved by discussion until mutual consensus was reached. A study was included if it met the following criteria: 1) patients: HE; 2) intervention: rifaximin plus lactulose; 3) control: lactulose alone; 4) outcome: the effective rate and mortality; effective rate was defined as improved clinical and neurological status, or significant decrease in HE; and 5) study design: RCT. This study did not contain any human participants, and the requirements for ethics approval and informed consent were not applicable.

Data collection and quality assessment

Two reviewers independently abstracted data and assessed quality. Any inconsistencies between the reviewers were discussed with an additional reviewer until a consensus was reached. The collected items included the name of the first author, publication year, country, sample size, mean age, proportion of male participants, HE type, etiology, severity, intervention, control, treatment duration, follow-up, and reported outcomes. The quality of each RCT was assessed using the Jadad scale, which assesses randomization, blinding, allocation concealment, withdrawals and dropouts, and the use of intention-to-treat analysis [18]. The scoring system for Jadad scale ranges from 0 to 5, and the studies with scores of 4 or 5 were considered of high quality.

Statistical analysis

The incidences of effective rate and mortality between rifaximin plus lactulose and lactulose alone in patients with HE were assigned as categorical data. Relative risks (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated before data pooling. Then, the pooled results were calculated using the random-effects model, which considers the underlying differences among included studies [19, 20]. Heterogeneity across included studies was assessed with the I2 and Q statistic, and significant heterogeneity was defined as I2 >50.0% or P <0.10 [21, 22]. Sensitivity analysis for effective rate and mortality was also conducted to assess the robustness of pooled results by sequential exclusion of individual studies [23]. Subgroup analysis for effective rate and mortality were also conducted based on country, mean age, male proportion, HE type, etiology, and study quality, and the difference between subgroups was assessed by using the interaction P test [24]. Publication bias for effective rate and mortality were also assessed by using funnel plots, Egger and Begg tests results [25, 26]. All statistical tests were two sided, and P values <0.05 were considered to be statistically significant. STATA software (version 10.0; StataCorp, Texas, USA) was applied to conduct all statistical analyses in this study.

Results

Literature search

The PRISMA flowchart of the study selection process is shown in Fig 1. In the initial electronic search, we found 391 eligible articles, and 281 articles were retained after duplicate records were removed. A total of 238 studies were further excluded due to irrelevancy. The remaining 43 studies were retrieved for further full-text evaluations, and 36 studies were excluded due to the following causes: other interventions (n = 19); not RCT (n = 13); review or meta-analysis (n = 4). Reviewing the reference lists of the remaining 7 studies did not reveal any new eligible studies. Finally, 7 RCTs were selected for our final meta-analysis [27–33].

Fig 1. The PRISMA flowchart for the literature search and study selection.

Fig 1

Open in a new tab

Study characteristics

The baseline characteristics of included studies and recruited patients are summarized in Table 1. A total of 843 patients with HE were included, and the sample size ranged from 62 to 200. Three RCTs were conducted in Pakistan, 2 in India, and the remaining 2 in China. Four trials included patients with HE, and the remaining 3 trials included patients with overt HE. Two of the included trials were of high quality and scored 4 on the Jadad score, 3 scored 3, and the remaining 2 scored 2.

Table 1. The baseline characteristics of included studies and patients.

Study Country Sample size Mean age (years) Male (%) HE type Etiology Severity Intervention Control Treatment duration Follow-up Study quality
Gao 2012 [24] China 62 (31/31) 59.5 66.1 HE Cirrhosis Not assigned Rafaximin 550 mg and lactulose 60 ml daily Lactulose 60 ml daily 10–15 days 10–15 days 2
Sharma 2013 [25] India 120 (63/57) 39.4 74.2 Overt HE Alcohol: 72; HBV: 32; HCV: 10; other: 29 CPT: 9.6; MELD: 24.3; HE grade (2/3/4): 22/40/58 Rafaximin 1,200 mg and lactulose 90–180 ml daily Lactulose 90–180 ml daily ≤ 10 days In-hospital 4
Gill 2014 [26] Pakistan 200 (100/100) 40.0 70.0 Overt HE Cirrhosis HE grade (2/3/4): 60/70/70 Rafaximin 1,100 mg and lactulose 60–180 ml daily Lactulose 60–180 ml daily 10 days In-hospital 3
Muhammad 2014 [27] Pakistan 160 (80/80) 41.0 55.6 HE Cirrhosis HE grade (1/2/3/4): 3/29/51/77 Rafaximin 1,100 mg and lactulose 90 ml daily Lactulose 90 ml daily 7 days 7 days 2
Hasan 2018 [28] India 91 (45/46) 44.9 81.3 Overt HE Alcohol: 81; others: 10 Not assigned Rafaximin 1,200 mg and lactulose 60–120 ml daily Lactulose 60–120 ml daily ≤ 10 days 10 days 4
Butt 2018 [29] Pakistan 130 (65/65) 56.1 53.1 HE Decompensated chronic liver disease HE grade (2/3/4): 43/49/38 Rafaximin 1,100 mg and lactulose 90 ml daily Lactulose 90 ml daily 10 days 10 days 3
Fan 2019 [30] China 80 (40/40) 44.6 76.3 HE Cirrhosis HE grade (1/2/3): 17/27/36 Rafaximin 800 mg and lactulose 30 ml daily Lactulose 30 ml daily 7 days 7 days 3
Open in a new tab

Meta-analysis

After pooling data from all included studies, we noted that the use of rifaximin plus lactulose was associated with an increased incidence of effective rate as compared with lactulose alone in patients with HE (RR, 1.30; 95% CI, 1.10–1.53; P = 0.002; Fig 2). Included trails were heterogeneous (I2 = 68.5%; P = 0.004). Furthermore, treatment with rifaximin plus lactulose was associated with a reduced risk of mortality as compared with lactulose alone (RR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.41–0.80; P = 0.001; Fig 3), and no heterogeneity was detected across included trials (I2 = 36.3%; P = 0.194).

Fig 2. Effect of rifaximin plus lactulose versus lactulose alone on the incidence of effective rate.

Fig 2

Open in a new tab

Fig 3. Effect of rifaximin plus lactulose versus lactulose alone on the risk of mortality.

Fig 3

Open in a new tab

Sensitivity and subgroup analyses

Sensitivity analyses were also performed for effective rate and mortality and are presented in Fig 4. The pooled data for effective rate were robust and this did not change by sequential exclusion of individual trials, whereas the pooled data for mortality were variable because of the smaller number of included trials. Although the significant differences between rifaximin plus lactulose and lactulose alone for the incidence of effective rate were observed in most subgroups, we noted that treatment with rifaximin plus lactulose was not associated with the incidence of effective rate when: pooled studies were conducted in India, male proportion was ≥70.0%, patients had overt HE, patients had other etiologies, or studies were of high quality (Table 2). Moreover, the risk of mortality was significantly reduced in patients treated with rifaximin plus lactulose when: pooled studies were conducted in Pakistan, mean age was <50.0 years, male proportion was <70.0%, patients had HE, the etiology was cirrhosis, or studies were of low quality (Table 2).

Fig 4. Sensitivity analyses for effective rate and mortality.

Fig 4

Open in a new tab

Table 2. Subgroup analyses for effective rate and mortality.

Outcomes Factors Subgroup RR and 95%CI P value Heterogeneity (%) P value for heterogeneity P value between subgroups
Effective rate Country China 1.22 (1.05–1.42) 0.009 0.0 0.860 0.153
Pakistan 1.41 (1.16–1.73) 0.001 49.6 0.138
India 1.24 (0.63–2.45) 0.534 91.2 0.001
Mean age (years) ≥ 50.0 1.19 (1.01–1.40) 0.041 0.0 0.787 0.287
< 50.0 1.35 (1.07–1.71) 0.012 77.6 0.001
Male proportion (%) ≥ 70.0 1.33 (0.98–1.81) 0.067 82.9 0.001 1.000
< 70.0 1.27 (1.11–1.45) 0.001 0.0 0.398
HE type HE 1.26 (1.12–1.41) < 0.001 0.0 0.599 0.763
Overt HE 1.37 (0.87–2.15) 0.173 88.3 < 0.001
Etiology Cirrhosis 1.37 (1.17–1.60) < 0.001 46.8 0.130 0.108
Other 1.20 (0.83–1.74) 0.325 81.5 0.004
Study quality High 1.24 (0.63–2.45) 0.534 91.2 0.001 0.251
Low 1.33 (1.16–1.52) < 0.001 37.8 0.170
Mortality Country Pakistan 0.51 (0.36–0.71) < 0.001 0.0 0.931 0.399
India 0.75 (0.29–1.93) 0.549 75.0 0.046
Mean age (years) ≥ 50.0 - - - - -
< 50.0 0.57 (0.41–0.80) 0.001 36.3 0.194
Male proportion (%) ≥ 70.0 0.62 (0.37–1.02) 0.059 56.5 0.101 0.731
< 70.0 0.52 (0.31–0.85) 0.009 - -
HE type HE 0.52 (0.31–0.85) 0.009 - - 0.731
Overt HE 0.62 (0.37–1.02) 0.059 56.5 0.101
Etiology Cirrhosis 0.51 (0.36–0.71) < 0.001 0.0 0.931 0.399
Other 0.75 (0.29–1.93) 0.549 75.0 0.046
Study quality High 0.75 (0.29–1.93) 0.549 75.0 0.046 0.399
Low 0.51 (0.36–0.71) < 0.001 0.0 0.931
Open in a new tab

Publication bias

There was no significant publication bias for effective rate (P value for Egger: 0.420; P value for Begg: 0.548; Fig 5A). Although no significant publication bias for mortality was found in the Begg test, the Egger test indicated potentially significant publication bias (P value for Egger: 0.032; P value for Begg: 0.734; Fig 5B). The pooled conclusion did not change after adjustment for potential publication bias by using the trim and fill method [34].

Fig 5. Funnel plot for effective rate and mortality.

Fig 5

Open in a new tab

(A) Effective rate. (B) Mortality.

Discussion

The current systematic review and meta-analysis compared the effectiveness of rifaximin plus lactulose with lactulose alone on the incidences of effective rate and mortality in patients with HE. This study included 7 RCTs and enrolled 843 patients with HE assessing a broad range of patient characteristics. This study found that the use of rifaximin plus lactulose could provide additional benefits on the incidences of effective rate and mortality than lactulose alone. Subgroup analyses found that the beneficial effects of rifaximin plus lactulose were mainly present in the following subgroups: studies conducted in China and Pakistan, mean age <50.0 years, male proportion <70.0%, patients with HE, cirrhosis as the etiology, or low-quality studies.

A meta-analysis by Eltawil et al including 12 RCTs found rifaximin could provide effects equivalent to those of disaccharides or other oral antibiotics, and had a better safety profile for patients with HE [35]. However, this study did not assess the treatment effectiveness of rifaximin plus lactulose, and the stratified analyses were mainly based on control. Wang et al conducted a meta-analysis of 5 RCTs and 5 observational studies and found rifaximin plus lactulose could yield additional benefits on effective rate and mortality. The pooled analyses of 5 RCTs found similar effectiveness of rifaximin plus lactulose in patients with HE [36]. However, stratified analyses according to study and patient characteristics were not provided. We therefore conducted an updated meta-analysis of RCTs to determine the effectiveness of rifaximin plus lactulose versus lactulose alone in patients with HE.

The summary result of our study indicated that rifaximin plus lactulose versus lactulose alone was associated with an increased incidence of effective rate. Most of the included trials reported similar conclusions or trends. However, Hasan et al found the use of lactulose alone could improve the neurological status in patients with overt HE [31]. The potential reason for this could be that intestinal bacteria overmultiply and intestinal dynamics are disturbed in patients with cirrhosis, which could induce an increase in the levels of inflammatory markers and aggravating liver damage. The use of rifaximin could inhibit the bacterial polymerase and block the transcription process of bacterial RNA, which could hinder the synthesis of bacterial protein and reduce the production of ammonia.

We noted the use of rifaximin plus lactulose could protect against the risk of mortality as compared with lactulose alone in patients with HE. The potential reason for this could be that rifaximin plus lactulose might reduce sepsis-related death because of a decrease in the blood levels of a gut-related endotoxin [28]. Moreover, the use of rifaximin plus lactulose might reduce the progression of HE and its severity [37]. However, in this study, there was only 1 study reporting adverse events between rifaximin plus lactulose and lactulose alone [28], which requires further verification in a large-scale RCT.

In subgroup analyses, the benefits between rifaximin plus lactulose and lactulose alone were found mainly in the following subgroups: studies conducted in China and Pakistan, mean age <50.0 years, male proportion <70.0%, patients with HE, cirrhosis as the etiology, or low-quality studies. Although the effects of rifaximin plus lactulose in India mainly affected by the study conducted by Hasan et al [31], and only 2 trials were conducted in India. Moreover, younger patients, patients with mild HE, and those with cirrhosis as the etiology could benefit more from rifaximin plus lactulose. Of note, women might benefit more than men, which might be related to their dietary lifestyle and the severity of disease. Finally, the quality of the study was correlated with the reliability of the pooled data, and the conclusions of this study warrant verification in further high-quality studies.

Several limitations of this study should be acknowledged. First, all of the included studies were conducted in China, Pakistan, and India, thus the conclusions were limited to reflect the exact effect in other countries. Second, the heterogeneity among included studies did not allow full interpretation by sensitivity and subgroup analyses. Third, only 4 of included trials reported the risk of mortality between rifaximin plus lactulose and lactulose alone, and the results of stratified analyses were variable. Fourth, this study has inherent limitations of traditional meta-analyses, including the use of pooled data and inevitable publication bias.

Conclusion

In conclusion, this study found the use of rifaximin plus lactulose could increase the incidence of effective rate, and reduce the risk of mortality when compared with lactulose alone in patients with HE. Therefore, rifaximin plus lactulose should be applied in clinical practice, especially in China, Pakistan, and India. A large-scale RCT is needed to compare the long-term effectiveness of rifaximin plus lactulose with lactulose alone in patients with HE.

Data Availability

All relevant data are within the paper.

Funding Statement

This study was supported by Hainan Health and family Planning industry research project (grant number: 20A200283). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

References

  • 1.Tapper EB, Zhao L, Nikirk S, Baki J, Parikh ND, Lok AS, et al. Incidence and Bedside Predictors of the First Episode of Overt Hepatic Encephalopathy in Patients With Cirrhosis. Am J Gastroenterol. 2020;115: 2017–2025. doi: 10.14309/ajg.0000000000000762 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Fichet J, Mercier E, Genée O, Garot D, Legras A, Dequin PF, et al. Prognosis and 1-year mortality of intensive care unit patients with severe hepatic encephalopathy. J Crit Care. 2009;24: 364–370. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrc.2009.01.008 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Luo M, Ma P, Li L, Cao WK. Advances in psychometric tests for screening minimal hepatic encephalopathy: From paper-and-pencil to computer-aided assessment. Turk J Gastroenterol. 2019;30: 398–407. doi: 10.5152/tjg.2019.18226 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Jepsen P, Ott P, Andersen PK, Sorensen HT, Vilstrup H. Clinical course of alcoholic liver cirrhosis: a Danish population-based cohort study. Hepatology. 2010;51: 1675–1682. doi: 10.1002/hep.23500 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Bajaj JS, Wade JB, Gibson DP, Heuman DM, Thacker LR, Sterling RK, et al. The multi-dimensional burden of cirrhosis and hepatic encephalopathy on patients and caregivers. Am J Gastroenterol. 2011;106: 1646–1653. doi: 10.1038/ajg.2011.157 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Dharel N, Bajaj JS. Definition and nomenclature of hepatic encephalopathy. J Clin Exp Hepatol. 2015;5: S37–41. doi: 10.1016/j.jceh.2014.10.001 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Tapper EB, Parikh ND, Green PK, Berry K, Waljee AK, Moon AM, et al. Reduced Incidence of Hepatic Encephalopathy and Higher Odds of Resolution Associated With Eradication of HCV Infection. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2020;18: 1197–1206.e1197. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2019.09.033 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Jia W, Liu J, Hu R, Hu A, Tang W, Li L, et al. Xiaochaihutang Improves the Cortical Astrocyte Edema in Thioacetamide-Induced Rat Acute Hepatic Encephalopathy by Activating NRF2 Pathway. Front Pharmacol. 2020;11: 382. doi: 10.3389/fphar.2020.00382 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Liotta EM, Kimberly WT. Cerebral edema and liver disease: Classic perspectives and contemporary hypotheses on mechanism. Neurosci Lett. 2020;721: 134818. doi: 10.1016/j.neulet.2020.134818 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Sun X, Lv Y, Huang L, Gao H, Ren C, Li J, et al. Pro-inflammatory cytokines serve as communicating molecules between the liver and brain for hepatic encephalopathy pathogenesis and Lycium barbarum polysaccharides protection. J Ethnopharmacol. 2020;248: 112357. doi: 10.1016/j.jep.2019.112357 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Malaquias MJ, Pinto CM, Ramos C, Ferreira S, Gandara J, Almeida A, et al. Acquired hepatocerebral degeneration and hepatic encephalopathy: one or two entities? Eur J Neurol. 2020;27: 2396–2404. doi: 10.1111/ene.14486 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Iwasa M, Takei Y. Pathophysiology and management of hepatic encephalopathy 2014 update: Ammonia toxicity and hyponatremia. Hepatol Res. 2015;45: 1155–1162. doi: 10.1111/hepr.12495 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Gluud LL, Dam G, Borre M, Les I, Cordoba J, Marchesini G, et al. Lactulose, rifaximin or branched chain amino acids for hepatic encephalopathy: what is the evidence? Metab Brain Dis. 2013;28: 221–225. doi: 10.1007/s11011-012-9372-0 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Als-Nielsen B, Gluud LL, Gluud C. Non-absorbable disaccharides for hepatic encephalopathy: systematic review of randomised trials. Bmj. 2004;328: 1046. doi: 10.1136/bmj.38048.506134.EE [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Pharmaceuticals Salix. Xifaxan (rifaximin) tablets, for oral use 2020. Available from: https://shared.salix.com/shared/pi/xifaxan550-pi.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Vilstrup H, Amodio P, Bajaj J, Cordoba J, Ferenci P, Mullen KD, et al. Hepatic encephalopathy in chronic liver disease: 2014 Practice Guideline by the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases and the European Association for the Study of the Liver. Hepatology. 2014;60: 715–735. doi: 10.1002/hep.27210 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, The PG. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement. PLOS Medicine. 2009;6: e1000097. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Jadad AR, Moore RA, Carroll D, Jenkinson C, Reynolds DJ, Gavaghan DJ, et al. Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: is blinding necessary? Control Clin Trials. 1996;17: 1–12. doi: 10.1016/0197-2456(95)00134-4 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.DerSimonian R, Laird N. Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Control Clin Trials. 1986;7: 177–188. doi: 10.1016/0197-2456(86)90046-2 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Ades AE, Lu G, Higgins JP. The interpretation of random-effects meta-analysis in decision models. Med Decis Making. 2005;25: 646–654. doi: 10.1177/0272989X05282643 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Deeks JJ, Fellow JPHSSV, Altman DG. Analyzing data and undertaking meta-analyses. In: Higgins J, Green S, editors. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions 501. Oxford, UK: 2008. [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Higgins JP, Thompson SG, Deeks JJ, Altman DG. Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. Bmj. 2003;327: 557–560. doi: 10.1136/bmj.327.7414.557 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Tobias A. Assessing the influence of a single study in the meta-analysis estimate. Stata Tech Bull. 1999;47: 15–17. [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Altman DG, Bland JM. Interaction revisited: the difference between two estimates. Bmj. 2003;326: 219. doi: 10.1136/bmj.326.7382.219 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Egger M, Davey Smith G, Schneider M, Minder C. Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. Bmj. 1997;315: 629–634. doi: 10.1136/bmj.315.7109.629 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Begg CB, Mazumdar M. Operating characteristics of a rank correlation test for publication bias. Biometrics. 1994;50: 1088–1101. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Gao ZM. Clinical observation of rifaximin combined with lactulose for the treatment of hepatic encephalopathy. J Chin Tradit Chinese Med Inform. 2012;4: 381. [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Sharma BC, Sharma P, Lunia MK, Srivastava S, Goyal R, Sarin SK. A randomized, double-blind, controlled trial comparing rifaximin plus lactulose with lactulose alone in treatment of overt hepatic encephalopathy. Am J Gastroenterol. 2013;108: 1458–1463. doi: 10.1038/ajg.2013.219 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Gill M, Niaz T, Aziz H, Khan S. P440 outcomes of rifaximin plus lactulose versus lactulose alone in treatment of overt hepatic encephalopathy. Journal of Hepatology. 2014;1: S215. [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Haq MIU, Salim A, Afzal MS, Malik K, Amin J, Butt AK. Comparison of rifaxamin and lactulose with lactulose alone in the treatment of acute hepatic encephalopathy in patients with liver cirrhosis. Precedings ShZayed Post Grad Med Inst. 2014;28: 115–119. [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Hasan S, Datta S, Bhattacherjee S, Banik S, Saha S, Bandyopadhyay D. A Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing the Efficacy of a Combination of Rifaximin and Lactulose with Lactulose only in the Treatment of Overt Hepatic Encephalopathy. J Assoc Physicians India. 2018;66: 32–36. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Butt NI, Butt UI, Kakar A, Malik T, Siddiqui AM. Is Lactulose Plus Rifaximin Better than Lactulose Alone in the Management of Hepatic Encephalopathy? J Coll Physicians Surg Pak. 2018;28: 115–117. doi: 10.29271/jcpsp.2018.02.115 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Fan S, Sun JB, Li J, et al. Effects of rifaximin combined with lactulose on the prognosis of hepatic encephalopathy and study on its mechanism. Pract Pharm Clin Remed. 2019;22: 606–609. [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Duval S, Tweedie R. A nonparametric “trim and fill” method of accounting for publication bias in meta-analysis. Journal of the american statistical association. 2000;95: 89–98. [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Eltawil KM, Laryea M, Peltekian K, Molinari M. Rifaximin vs. conventional oral therapy for hepatic encephalopathy: a meta-analysis. World J Gastroenterol. 2012;18: 767–777. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v18.i8.767 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Wang Z, Chu P, Wang W. Combination of rifaximin and lactulose improves clinical efficacy and mortality in patients with hepatic encephalopathy. Drug Des Devel Ther. 2019;13: 1–11. doi: 10.2147/DDDT.S172324 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Mas A, Rodés J, Sunyer L, Rodrigo L, Planas R, Vargas V, et al. Comparison of rifaximin and lactitol in the treatment of acute hepatic encephalopathy: results of a randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, controlled clinical trial. J Hepatol. 2003;38: 51–58. doi: 10.1016/s0168-8278(02)00350-1 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Data Availability Statement

All relevant data are within the paper.

Articles from PLoS ONE are provided here courtesy of PLOS

RESOURCES