Lactitol vs. lactulose in the treatment of chronic recurrent portal-systemic encephalopathy

Biological Activities of Lactose-Derived Prebiotics and Symbiotic with Probiotics on Gastrointestinal System

Lactose-derived prebiotics provide wide ranges of gastrointestinal comforts. In this review article, the probable biochemical mechanisms through which lactose-derived prebiotics offer positive gastrointestinal health are reported along with the up-to-date results of clinical investigations; this might be the first review article of its kind, to the best of our knowledge. Lactose-derived prebiotics have unique biological and functional values, and they are confirmed as ‘safe’ by the Food and Drug Administration federal agency. Medical practitioners frequently recommend them as therapeutics as a pure form or combined with dairy-based products (yoghurt, milk and infant formulas) or fruit juices. The biological activities of lactose-derived prebiotics are expressed in the presence of gut microflora, mainly probiotics (Lactobacillus spp. in the small intestine and Bifidobacterium spp. in the large intestine). Clinical investigations reveal that galacto-oligosaccharide reduces the risks of several types of diarrhea (traveler’s diarrhea, osmotic diarrhea and Clostridium difficile associated relapsing diarrhea). Lactulose and lactosucrose prevent inflammatory bowel diseases (Crohn’s disease and ulcerative colitis). Lactulose and lactitol reduce the risk of hepatic encephalopathy. Furthermore, lactulose, galacto-oligosaccharide and lactitol prevent constipation in individuals of all ages. It is expected that the present review article will receive great attention from medical practitioners and food technologists.

Nonabsorbable disaccharides for hepatic encephalopathy: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Nonabsorbable disaccharides (NADs) have been used to treat hepatic encephalopathy (HE) since 1966. However, a Cochrane Review, published in 2004, found insufficient evidence to recommend their use in this context. This updated systematic review evaluates the effects of the NADs, lactulose and lactitol, for the treatment and prevention of HE in patients with cirrhosis. Thirty-eight randomized controlled trials, involving 1,828 patients, were identified through electronic and manual searches; 31 randomized controlled trials looked at the treatment of HE, while seven looked at its primary/secondary prevention. Random-effects meta-analyses showed that, compared to placebo/no intervention, NADs had a beneficial effect on HE (relative risk [RR] = 0.63, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.53-0.74, number needed to treat [NNT] = 4) and serious liver-related adverse events such as liver failure, variceal bleeding, serious infections, spontaneous bacterial peritonitis, and hepatorenal syndrome (RR = 0.42, 95% CI 0.26-0.69, NNT = 50). Treatment was also associated with a reduction in mortality in patients with overt HE (RR = 0.36, 95% CI 0.14-0.94, NNT = 20), although not in patients with minimal HE. Meta-analyses of the prevention randomized controlled trials showed that NADs prevented the development of HE (RR = 0.47, 95% CI 0.33-0.68, NNT = 6), the risk of developing serious liver-related adverse events (RR = 0.48, 95% CI 0.33-0.70, NNT = 6), and reduced mortality (RR = 0.63, 95% CI 0.40-0.98, NNT = 20). Use of NADs was associated with nonserious gastrointestinal adverse events. There were no differences in the efficacy or safety of lactulose and lactitol.

CONCLUSIONS

NADs have beneficial effects in the treatment and prevention of HE; their use, in this context, confers additional benefits including a reduction in serious liver-related morbidities and all-cause mortality. (Hepatology 2016;64:908-922).

Non-absorbable disaccharides versus placebo/no intervention and lactulose versus lactitol for the prevention and treatment of hepatic encephalopathy in people with cirrhosis

BACKGROUND

Non-absorbable disaccharides (lactulose and lactitol) are recommended as first-line treatment for hepatic encephalopathy. The previous (second) version of this review included 10 randomised clinical trials (RCTs) evaluating non-absorbable disaccharides versus placebo/no intervention and eight RCTs evaluating lactulose versus lactitol for people with cirrhosis and hepatic encephalopathy. The review found no evidence to either support or refute the use of the non-absorbable disaccharides and no differences between lactulose versus lactitol.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the beneficial and harmful effects of i) non-absorbable disaccharides versus placebo/no intervention and ii) lactulose versus lactitol in people with cirrhosis and hepatic encephalopathy.

SEARCH METHODS

We carried out electronic searches of the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2015, Issue 10), MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Science Citation Index Expanded to 19 October 2015; manual searches of meetings and conference proceedings; checks of bibliographies; and correspondence with investigators and pharmaceutical companies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included RCTs, irrespective of publication status, language, or blinding.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors, working independently, retrieved data from published reports and correspondence with investigators. The primary outcomes were mortality, hepatic encephalopathy, and serious adverse events. We presented the results of meta-analyses as risk ratios (RR) and mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). We assessed the quality of the evidence using 'Grading of Recommendations Assessment Development and Evaluation' (GRADE) and bias control using the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group domains. Our analyses included regression analyses of publication bias and other small study effects, Trial Sequential Analyses to detect type 1 and type 2 errors, and subgroup and sensitivity analyses.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 38 RCTs with a total of 1828 participants. Eight RCTs had a low risk of bias in the assessment of mortality. All trials had a high risk of bias in the assessment of the remaining outcomes. Random-effects meta-analysis showed a beneficial effect of non-absorbable disaccharides versus placebo/no intervention on mortality when including all RCTs with extractable data (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.87; 1487 participants; 24 RCTs; I(2) = 0%; moderate quality evidence) and in the eight RCTs with a low risk of bias (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.97; 705 participants). The Trial Sequential Analysis with the relative risk reduction (RRR) reduced to 30% confirmed the findings when including all RCTs, but not when including only RCTs with a low risk of bias or when we reduced the RRR to 22%. Compared with placebo/no intervention, the non-absorbable disaccharides were associated with beneficial effects on hepatic encephalopathy (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.69; 1415 participants; 22 RCTs; I(2) = 32%; moderate quality evidence). Additional analyses showed that non-absorbable disaccharides can help to reduce serious adverse events associated with the underlying liver disease including liver failure, hepatorenal syndrome, and variceal bleeding (RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.60; 1487 participants; 24 RCTs; I(2) = 0%; moderate quality evidence). We confirmed the results in Trial Sequential Analysis. Tests for subgroup differences showed no statistical differences between RCTs evaluating prevention, overt, or minimal hepatic encephalopathy. The evaluation of secondary outcomes showed a potential beneficial effect of the non-absorbable disaccharides on quality of life, but we were not able to include the data in an overall meta-analysis (very low quality evidence). Non-absorbable disaccharides were associated with non-serious (mainly gastrointestinal) adverse events (very low quality evidence). None of the RCTs comparing lactulose versus lactitol evaluated quality of life. The review found no differences between lactulose and lactitol for the remaining outcomes (very low quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review includes a large number of RCTs evaluating the prevention or treatment of hepatic encephalopathy. The analyses found evidence that non-absorbable disaccharides may be associated with a beneficial effect on clinically relevant outcomes compared with placebo/no intervention.

Non-absorbable disaccharides versus placebo/no intervention and lactulose versus lactitol for the prevention and treatment of hepatic encephalopathy in people with cirrhosis

BACKGROUND

Non-absorbable disaccharides (lactulose and lactitol) are recommended as first-line treatment for hepatic encephalopathy. The previous (second) version of this review included 10 randomised clinical trials (RCTs) evaluating non-absorbable disaccharides versus placebo/no intervention and eight RCTs evaluating lactulose versus lactitol for people with cirrhosis and hepatic encephalopathy. The review found no evidence to either support or refute the use of the non-absorbable disaccharides and no differences between lactulose versus lactitol.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the beneficial and harmful effects of i) non-absorbable disaccharides versus placebo/no intervention and ii) lactulose versus lactitol in people with cirrhosis and hepatic encephalopathy.

SEARCH METHODS

We carried out electronic searches of the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2015, Issue 10), MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Science Citation Index Expanded to 19 October 2015; manual searches of meetings and conference proceedings; checks of bibliographies; and correspondence with investigators and pharmaceutical companies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included RCTs, irrespective of publication status, language, or blinding.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors, working independently, retrieved data from published reports and correspondence with investigators. The primary outcomes were mortality, hepatic encephalopathy, and serious adverse events. We presented the results of meta-analyses as risk ratios (RR) and mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). We assessed the quality of the evidence using 'Grading of Recommendations Assessment Development and Evaluation' (GRADE) and bias control using the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group domains. Our analyses included regression analyses of publication bias and other small study effects, Trial Sequential Analyses to detect type 1 and type 2 errors, and subgroup and sensitivity analyses.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 38 RCTs with a total of 1828 participants. Eight RCTs had a low risk of bias in the assessment of mortality. All trials had a high risk of bias in the assessment of the remaining outcomes. Random-effects meta-analysis showed a beneficial effect of non-absorbable disaccharides versus placebo/no intervention on mortality when including all RCTs with extractable data (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.87; 1487 participants; 24 RCTs; I(2) = 0%; moderate quality evidence) and in the eight RCTs with a low risk of bias (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.97; 705 participants). The Trial Sequential Analysis with the relative risk reduction (RRR) reduced to 30% confirmed the findings when including all RCTs, but not when including only RCTs with a low risk of bias or when we reduced the RRR to 22%. Compared with placebo/no intervention, the non-absorbable disaccharides were associated with beneficial effects on hepatic encephalopathy (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.69; 1415 participants; 22 RCTs; I(2) = 32%; moderate quality evidence). Additional analyses showed that non-absorbable disaccharides can help to reduce serious adverse events associated with the underlying liver disease including liver failure, hepatorenal syndrome, and variceal bleeding (RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.60; 1487 participants; 24 RCTs; I(2) = 0%; moderate quality evidence). We confirmed the results in Trial Sequential Analysis. Tests for subgroup differences showed no statistical differences between RCTs evaluating prevention, overt, or minimal hepatic encephalopathy. The evaluation of secondary outcomes showed a potential beneficial effect of the non-absorbable disaccharides on quality of life, but we were not able to include the data in an overall meta-analysis (very low quality evidence). Non-absorbable disaccharides were associated with non-serious (mainly gastrointestinal) adverse events (very low quality evidence). None of the RCTs comparing lactulose versus lactitol evaluated quality of life. The review found no differences between lactulose and lactitol for the remaining outcomes (very low quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review includes a large number of RCTs evaluating the prevention or treatment of hepatic encephalopathy. The analyses found evidence that non-absorbable disaccharides may be associated with a beneficial effect on clinically relevant outcomes compared with placebo/no intervention.

Refining the ammonia hypothesis: a physiology-driven approach to the treatment of hepatic encephalopathy

Hepatic encephalopathy (HE) is one of the most important complications of cirrhosis and portal hypertension. Although the etiology is incompletely understood, it has been linked to ammonia directly and indirectly. Our goal is to review for the clinician the mechanisms behind hyperammonemia and the pathogenesis of HE to explain the rationale for its therapy. We reviewed articles collected through a search of MEDLINE/PubMed, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Google Scholar between October 1, 1948, and December 8, 2014, and by a manual search of citations within retrieved articles. Search terms included hepatic encephalopathy, ammonia hypothesis, brain and ammonia, liver failure and ammonia, acute-on-chronic liver failure and ammonia, cirrhosis and ammonia, portosytemic shunt, ammonia and lactulose, rifaximin, zinc, and nutrition. Ammonia homeostatsis is a multiorgan process involving the liver, brain, kidneys, and muscle as well as the gastrointestinal tract. Indeed, hyperammonemia may be the first clue to poor functional reserves, malnutrition, and impending multiorgan dysfunction. Furthermore, the neuropathology of ammonia is critically linked to states of systemic inflammation and endotoxemia. Given the complex interplay among ammonia, inflammation, and other factors, ammonia levels have questionable utility in the staging of HE. The use of nonabsorbable disaccharides, antibiotics, and probiotics reduces gut ammoniagenesis and, in the case of antibiotics and probiotics, systemic inflammation. Nutritional support preserves urea cycle function and prevents wasting of skeletal muscle, a significant site of ammonia metabolism. Correction of hypokalemia, hypovolemia, and acidosis further assists in the reduction of ammonia production in the kidney. Finally, early and aggressive treatment of infection, avoidance of sedatives, and modification of portosystemic shunts are also helpful in reducing the neurocognitive effects of hyperammonemia. Refining the ammonia hypothesis to account for these other factors instructs a solid foundation for the effective treatment and prevention of hepatic encephalopathy.

Management of overt hepatic encephalopathy

Hepatic encephalopathy (HE) is an important complication of cirrhosis with significant morbidity and mortality. Management of HE primarily involves avoidance of precipitating factors and administration of various ammonia-lowering therapies such as non-absorbable disaccharides, antimicrobial agents like rifaximin and l-ornithine l-aspartate. The non-absorbable disaccharides which include lactulose and lactitol are considered the first-line therapy for the treatment of HE and in primary and secondary prophylaxis of HE. Lactitol is comparable to lactulose in the treatment of HE with fewer side effects. Rifaximin is effective in treatment of HE and recent systemic reviews found it comparable to disaccharides and is effective in secondary prophylaxis of HE. Many agents like l-ornithine l-aspartate, probiotics, zinc, sodium benzoate have been tried either alone or in combination with lactulose for the treatment of HE. Combination therapy of disaccharides either with rifaximin, l-ornithine l-aspartate, probiotics for the treatment of HE needs further validation in large studies.

Efficacy and tolerance of lactitol supplementation for adult constipation: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Constipation is a common complaint in adults. Lactitol is an osmotic disaccharide laxative that increases fecal volume and stimulates peristalsis. In this paper, we present the first meta-analysis on the efficacy and tolerance of lactitol for adult constipation.

Methods

We searched MEDLINE^® and Embase, with no date or language restrictions, for studies of lactitol supplementation on adult constipation. A random-effects meta-analysis was performed on pre- to posttreatment changes in stool frequency and consistency with lactitol among all studies, as well as a comparison of efficacy and tolerance outcomes in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of lactitol versus lactulose.

Results

A total of eleven studies representing 663 distinct patients were included in the final analysis, including five single-arm studies, four RCTs comparing lactitol with lactulose, one RCT comparing lactitol with placebo, and one nonrandomized controlled trial comparing lactitol with stimulant laxatives. Weekly stool frequency was significantly increased with lactitol compared with baseline (standardized mean difference [SMD]: 1.56, P<0.001). Stool consistency also improved over the supplementation period with lactitol (SMD: 1.04, P<0.001). Approximately one-third of patients experienced an adverse event; however, symptoms were generally mild and rarely (5%) resulted in study withdrawal. In RCTs of lactitol versus lactulose, lactitol was slightly more effective than lactulose in increasing weekly stool frequency (SMD: 0.19, P=0.06). No statistically significant differences between lactitol and lactulose were identified in any other efficacy or tolerance outcome. Lactitol demonstrated favorable efficacy and tolerance in individual studies when compared to stimulant laxatives and placebo.

Conclusion

Lactitol supplementation is well tolerated and improves symptoms of adult constipation. The efficacy and tolerance of lactitol and lactulose are similar, with a trend for more frequent stools with lactitol. Limited evidence suggests lactitol is superior to stimulant laxatives and placebo for relieving constipation symptoms.

Disaccharides in the treatment of hepatic encephalopathy

Management of hepatic encephalopathy (HE) primarily involves avoidance of precipitating factors and administration of various ammonia-lowering therapies such as nonabsorbable disaccharides and antimicrobial agents like rifaximin. The nonabsorbable disaccharides which include lactulose and lactitol are considered the first-line therapy for the treatment of HE and minimal hepatic encephalopathy (MHE). Lactulose significantly improves cognitive function and health-related quality of life in patients with MHE. Lactitol is comparable to lactulose in the treatment of HE with fewer side effects. Lactulose has also shown to be effective in primary and secondary prophylaxis of HE. Disaccharides were found to be comparable to rifaximin in recent systemic reviews in the treatment of HE however conclusion was based on inclusion of some poor quality trials. Combination therapy of disaccharides either with rifaximin, L-ornithine L-aspartate,probiotics for the treatment of HE needs further validation in large studies.

Impact of pretransplant hepatic encephalopathy on liver posttransplantation outcomes

Patients with cirrhosis commonly experience hepatic encephalopathy (HE), a condition associated with alterations in behavior, cognitive function, consciousness, and neuromuscular function of varying severity. HE occurring before liver transplant can have a substantial negative impact on posttransplant outcomes, and preoperative history of HE may be a predictor of posttransplant neurologic complications. Even with resolution of previous episodes of overt or minimal HE, some patients continue to experience cognitive deficits after transplant. Because HE is one of the most frequent pretransplant complications, improving patient HE status before transplant may improve outcomes. Current pharmacologic therapies for HE, whether for the treatment of minimal or overt HE or for prevention of HE relapse, are primarily directed at reducing cerebral exposure to systemic levels of gut-derived toxins (e.g., ammonia). The current mainstays of HE therapy are nonabsorbable disaccharides and antibiotics. The various impacts of adverse effects (such as diarrhea, abdominal distention, and dehydration) on patient's health and nutritional status should be taken into consideration when deciding the most appropriate HE management strategy in patients awaiting liver transplant. This paper reviews the potential consequences of pretransplant HE on posttransplant outcomes and therapeutic strategies for the pretransplant management of HE.

Meta-analysis: the effects of gut flora modulation using prebiotics, probiotics and synbiotics on minimal hepatic encephalopathy

BACKGROUND

Minimal hepatic encephalopathy (MHE) is characterised by subtle neurocognitive deficits without overt clinical manifestations. Although several trials have individually evaluated the role of prebiotics, probiotics and synbiotics, there is yet no consensus on the management of MHE.

AIM

To estimate the efficacy of prebiotics, probiotics and synbiotics in MHE in randomised controlled trials.

METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were searched for published studies in all languages. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were defined a priori. Pooled relative risk and heterogeneity were estimated as the measures of association.

RESULTS

Nine studies met our inclusion criteria. Use of prebiotics, probiotics and synbiotics significantly reduced the pooled relative risk (RR) of no improvement of MHE (RR 0.40, 95% CI 0.32-0.50; P<0.001). Upon subgroup analysis, five studies with lactulose showed significant reduction of risk of no improvement of MHE (RR 0.34, 95% CI 0.24-0.47; P<0.0001) with no inter-trial heterogeneity. In two trials each of probiotics and synbiotics, their use was associated with significant beneficial effects (RR 0.41, 95% CI 0.26-0.65; P<0.0001 and RR of 0.51, 95% CI 0.32-0.80; P=0.004 respectively). There were no major adverse events though probiotics and synbiotics were better tolerated than lactulose.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of prebiotics, probiotics and synbiotics was associated with significant improvement in minimal hepatic encephalopathy. Among individual agents, lactulose appears to have the most beneficial effect, followed closely by probiotics and synbiotics.

Secondary prophylaxis of hepatic encephalopathy: an open-label randomized controlled trial of lactulose versus placebo

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Hepatic encephalopathy (HE) is associated with a poor prognosis. Lactulose is used for the treatment of HE. There is no study on the prevention of recurrence of HE using lactulose.

METHODS

Consecutive cirrhotic patients who recovered from HE were randomized to receive lactulose (HE-L group) or placebo (HE-NL group). All patients were assessed by psychometry (number connection test [NCT-A and B], figure connection test if illiterate [FCT-A and B], digit symbol test [DST], and object assembly test [OAT]), critical flicker frequency test, and blood ammonia at inclusion. Primary end point was development of overt HE.

RESULTS

Of 300 patients with HE who recovered, 140 (46.6%) met the inclusion criteria and were included. There was a high prevalence of abnormal psychometry test results (NCT-A, 67.5%; NCT-B, 62.5%; DST, 70%; and OAT, 80%), and FCT-A and B were abnormal in 10 of 14 patients. Critical flicker frequency was <38 Hz in 77 patients (55%). Twelve (19.6%) of 61 patients in the HE-L group and 30 (46.8%) of 64 in the HE-NL group (P = .001) developed HE over a median follow-up of 14 months (range, 1-20 months). Readmission rate due to causes other than HE (HE-L vs HE-NL, 9:6; P = NS) and deaths (HE-L vs HE-NL, 5:11; P = .18) in 2 groups were similar. Recurrence of overt HE was significantly associated with 2 or more abnormal psychometric tests after the recovery of an episode of HE (r = 0.369, P = .02).

CONCLUSIONS

Lactulose is effective for prevention of recurrence of HE in patients with cirrhosis.

The cost-effectiveness and budget impact of competing therapies in hepatic encephalopathy - a decision analysis

BACKGROUND

Treatment options for hepatic encephalopathy have disparate risks and benefits. Non-absorbable disaccharides and neomycin are limited by uncertain efficacy and common dose-limiting side effects. In contrast, rifaximin is safe and effective in hepatic encephalopathy, but is more expensive.

METHODS

We conducted a decision analysis to calculate the cost-effectiveness of six strategies in hepatic encephalopathy: (i) no hepatic encephalopathy treatment, (ii) lactulose monotherapy, (iii) lactitol monotherapy, (iv) neomycin monotherapy, (v) rifaximin monotherapy and (vi) up-front lactulose with crossover to rifaximin if poor response or intolerance of lactulose ('rifaximin salvage'). The primary outcome was cost per quality-adjusted life-year gained.

RESULTS

Under base-case conditions, 'do nothing' was least effective and rifaximin salvage was most effective. Lactulose monotherapy was least expensive, and rifaximin monotherapy was most expensive. When balancing cost and effectiveness, lactulose monotherapy and rifaximin salvage dominated alternative strategies. Compared to lactulose monotherapy, rifaximin salvage cost an incremental US$2315 per quality-adjusted life-year-gained. The cost of rifaximin had to fall below US$1.03/tab in order for rifaximin monotherapy to dominate lactulose monotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Rifaximin monotherapy is not cost-effective in the treatment of chronic hepatic encephalopathy at current average wholesale prices. However, a hybrid salvage strategy, reserving rifaximin for lactulose-refractory patients, may be highly cost-effective.

Nonabsorbable disaccharides for hepatic encephalopathy

BACKGROUND

Nonabsorbable disaccharides (lactulose or lactitol) are considered the treatment of choice for hepatic encephalopathy.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the beneficial and harmful effects of nonabsorbable disaccharides for patients with hepatic encephalopathy.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Trials were identified through The Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register (March 2003), The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (Issue 1, 2003), MEDLINE (1966 to 2003/03), EMBASE (1980 to 2003/03), manual searches of bibliographies and journals, authors of trials, and pharmaceutical companies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised trials comparing lactulose or lactitol versus no intervention, placebo, or antibiotics and trials comparing lactulose versus lactitol for hepatic encephalopathy.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

The primary outcome measures included no improvement of hepatic encephalopathy and all-cause mortality. Binary outcomes are reported as relative risks (RR) based on a random effects model. Subgroup analyses were performed with regard to methodological quality and form of hepatic encephalopathy.

MAIN RESULTS

Thirty trials assessed nonabsorbable disaccharides versus placebo, no intervention, or antibiotics or assessed lactulose versus lactitol. We could not extract data from all trials. Compared with placebo or no intervention, nonabsorbable disaccharides had no statistically significant effect on mortality (RR 0.41, 95% CI 0.02 to 8.68, four trials), but appeared to reduce the risk of no improvement of hepatic encephalopathy (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.46 to 0.84, six trials). However, this result may reflect bias due to low methodological quality of the majority of included trials. Trials of high methodological quality found no significant effect of nonabsorbable disaccharides on the risk of no improvement (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.42 to 2.04, two trials). We found no statistically significant difference between lactulose and lactitol on mortality (two trials) or risk of no improvement (four trials). However, our meta-analyses were underpowered to establish whether these treatments have comparable effect. Nonabsorbable disaccharides appeared to be inferior to antibiotics on reducing the risk of no improvement (RR 1.24, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.50, 10 trials).

REVIEWERS' CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review questions the beneficial effects of nonabsorbable disaccharides and highlights that there is insufficient high-quality evidence to support this treatment. We found that antibiotics appeared to be superior to nonabsorbable disaccharides in improving hepatic encephalopathy, but it is unclear whether this difference in treatment effect is clinically important to patients. Nonabsorbable disaccharides should not serve as comparator in randomised trials on hepatic encephalopathy.

Lactulose-induced diarrhoea in rats: effects on caecal development and activities of microbial enzymes

The intake of large amounts of lactulose and other non-digestible oligosaccharides can cause diarrhoea in rats and humans. The purpose of our study was to estimate tendency and scope of changes in caecum development, amount and composition of caecal digesta and activity of caecal microbial enzymes under the influence of lactulose-rich diet evoking or not evoking diarrhoea. Male Wistar rats were fed on 8%-lactulose diet for 4 weeks. Feeding with lactulose induced enlargement of the caecum (digesta and wall) compared to the control group. However, the hypertrophy of the caecal wall in rats with diarrhoea was less than in these without that ailment. Dry matter of caecal digesta was significantly decreased in rats with diarrhoea. Diarrhoea lowered concentrations of enzymatic protein and short-chain fatty acids in the caecum, and the activity of bacterial beta-glucuronidase, alpha- and beta-galactosidase, alpha- and beta-glucosidase in caecal digesta, compared to rats without diarrhoea. The ammonia concentration in the caecum was enhanced by diarrhoea symptoms. Occurrence of diarrhoea significantly deteriorated functioning of the caecal ecosystem what in turn limited potential benefits of diet supplementation with lactulose.

Tolerance of low-digestible carbohydrates: a general view

The tolerance of low-digestible carbohydrates (LDCs) may be measured as the potential to cause abdominal symptoms and laxation. Tolerance of any one LDC is determined by its concentration in the food product eaten, the amount of the food product eaten, the frequency of eating the food and the consumption of other foods (increasing tolerance) and water decreasing tolerance). Added to these, individuals vary considerably in their response to low-digestible carbohydrates in the reporting of gastrointestinal symptoms. A precise maximum no-response dose is sometimes difficult to obtain because some dose--response curves are distinctly sigmoidal. Food regulators hoping to set a trigger level at which laxation may occur have been unable to take account of all these factors because the necessary information matrices are not available for any one LDC. Nevertheless analysis of the data shows consistent trends and for circumstances when food is consumed throughout the day it now seems feasible to assign specific tolerances to specific low-digestible carbohydrates, especially the polyols for which most is known. The method by which the no-effect dose or laxative threshold is expressed is critical to its application to individual foods.

Effects of long-term administration of low-dose lactitol in patients with cirrhosis but without overt encephalopathy

To investigate the efficacy and the acceptability of different doses of lactitol in patients with subclinical hepatic encephalopathy, 28 patients with cirrhosis were enrolled in a controlled clinical trial comparing 5-month therapies with lactitol at two different doses: 0.3 and 0.5 g/kg bw per day. This period was followed by 1 month of recovery. Patients were monitored with venous blood ammonia determination, three psychometric tests, clinical evaluation of mental status and EEG. The porto-systemic encephalopathy index of Conn was determined periodically. Twenty-two patients completed the trial (11 for each dose of lactitol). Both doses of lactitol decreased plasma ammonia levels and improved the porto-systemic encephalopathy index. The higher dose was more effective in improving performance in the psychometric tests. After the period of recovery, both the porto-systemic encephalopathy index and the psychometric test scores returned to pretreatment values. Lactitol was tolerated well by patients. Three patients given the higher dose reported periodic intestinal discomfort, but did not stop taking lactitol or reduce the dosage; no side-effects were reported by the patients taking the lower dose. These results indicate that lactitol in doses ranging from 0.3 to 0.5 g/kg bw is a well-tolerated and effective treatment for subclinical encephalopathy.

Lactulose--a potential drug for the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease

Lactulose is a drug mainly used as a laxative and for the treatment of porto-systemic encephalopathy. Following oral administration, intact lactulose reaches the colon, where it is split by bacteria, leading to a reduction in faecal pH and creating intestinal conditions beneficial to Lactobacillus acidophilus and inhibitory to coliform bacteria, bacteroides, Salmonella and Shigella. It was shown that lactulose therapy clears faecal salmonella and shigella species and reduces the prevalence of urinary-tract infection and respiratory tract infections. Oral administration of lactulose abolishes and prevents systemic endotoxemia of gut origin. Therefore lactulose may be used for treatment of inflammatory bowel disease as bacteria and bacterial endotoxin have an important role in the pathogenesis of this disease.

Lactitol in treatment of chronic hepatic encephalopathy. A meta-analysis

The efficacy and side effects of lactitol in the treatment of chronic hepatic encephalopathy was compared to that of other disaccharides in a meta-analysis of published randomized clinical trials (RCTs). The outcomes assessed were: (1) the rate of patients free from episodes of clinically detectable encephalopathy, and (2) the rate of patients free from one or more side effects in the different treatment groups. Four RCTs were eligible for analysis; in three lactitol was compared to lactulose, in one the alternative treatment was lactose in lactase-deficient patients. The methodological quality of these studies was high. Meta-analysis showed that lactitol was as effective as other disaccharides in the treatment of encephalopathy: pooled odds ratio was 0.83, 95% confidence interval was 0.38-1.82. Results were not sensitive to the use of alternative methods of counting and attributing events in these trials. Patients experienced fewer side effects during treatment with lactitol, but the pooled odds ratio was not statistically significant. In all studies lactitol was considered more palatable. Clinical effectiveness of lactitol, in long-term treatment of chronic encephalopathy, is similar to those of lactulose. It seems that lactitol has lower side effects than lactulose. Future RCTs with a double-blind design could be mainly aimed at evaluating the side-effect profile of the two disaccharides.

Lactitol or lactulose in the treatment of chronic hepatic encephalopathy: results of a meta-analysis

Lactitol (beta-galactosido-sorbitol) has been recently compared with lactulose for the treatment of chronic hepatic encephalopathy in a few studies, each comprising a small number of patients. The results are controversial. We studied the efficiency and tolerance of both compounds by using a meta-analysis on the basis of published controlled trials. Our study only included controlled or randomized trials comprising cirrhotic patients with chronic hepatic encephalopathy. Analyzed parameters were the portosystemic encephalopathy index of Conn after treatment, the percentage of improved patients and the percentage of patients who had ill effects related to the treatment (flatulence, diarrhea). Bibliographical screening revealed five studies comparing the effects of lactitol and lactulose in chronic hepatic encephalopathy. Four crossover studies were done that included 48 patients and one parallel study that included 29 patients. The duration of the treatment ranged from 3 to 6 mo. All studies found a similar efficiency with both drugs. However, they exhibited some discrepancies in the relative frequency of adverse reactions (flatulence). Meta-analysis showed no statistical differences in the portosystemic encephalopathy index after lactitol or lactulose treatment. The percentage of improved patients after lactitol or lactulose was similar. In contrast, the analysis revealed a higher frequency (p less than 0.01) of flatulence in patients treated with lactulose compared with those treated with lactitol. In conclusion, this meta-analysis shows no statistical difference between therapeutic effects of lactitol and lactulose, but it does show a higher frequency of flatulence with lactulose. This suggests that lactitol should be preferred to lactulose for the treatment of chronic hepatic encephalopathy.

Effects of lactulose and lactitol on protein digestion and metabolism in conventional and germ free animal models: relevance of the results to their use in the treatment of portosystemic encephalopathy

Protein digestion and metabolism have been studied in laboratory rats and miniature pigs to investigate the mechanisms of action of lactulose and lactitol when used in the treatment of patients with portosystemic encephalopathy. Lactulose (beta-D-galactopyranosyl-(1----4)-beta-D-fructofuranose) and lactitol (beta-D-galactopyranosyl-(1----4)-D-glucitol) increased the excretion of nitrogenous material in the faeces and decreased nitrogen excretion in the urine in a similar degree to that reported for human patients. In studies with germ free rats given lactulose no such effect was observed, suggesting that, for lactulose at least, these effects are mediated by the gut flora. Measurement of the alpha-, epsilon-diaminopimelic acid content of the faeces confirmed that the enhancement of faecal nitrogen was due to an increased contribution from bacteria. The similarity in the results for lactulose and lactitol suggests that, from the perspective of protein metabolism, lactitol acts in a similar way to lactulose in the treatment of portosystemic encephalopathy.

Effects of the glucosidase inhibitor acarbose in patients with liver cirrhosis

In this preliminary study, we examined the effects of acarbose and placebo together with a standardized breakfast on blood glucose levels, on breath hydrogen excretion and on plasma insulin and glucagon levels; in addition, the effects on fasting blood levels of metabolites were studied following an evening meal with acarbose or placebo. Acarbose significantly reduced blood glucose levels in 10 patients with alcoholic cirrhosis following a meal containing 100 g of carbohydrate. There were no significant changes in plasma insulin after breakfast but glucagon levels were increased at 1 h after the meal. Breath hydrogen excretion did not change significantly. Acarbose given with a late evening snack reduced fasting beta-hydroxybutyrate levels the next morning in these cirrhotic patients.