Copyright
©2011 Baishideng Publishing Group Co.
World J Gastroenterol. Oct 14, 2011; 17(38): 4321-4333
Published online Oct 14, 2011. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v17.i38.4321
Published online Oct 14, 2011. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v17.i38.4321
First author, year[Ref.] | Group (n) | Interventions on mothers | Maternal HBV DNA level1 | Newborns within 24 h | Infants within 6-12 mo | Adverse events | ||||||
Before intervention | Before delivery | HBsAg(+) | HBeAg(+) | HBV DNA (+) | HBsAg(+) | HBeAg(+) | HBV DNA (+) | Mothers | Infants | |||
Zhang, 2010[21] | Arm 1:50 | 3TC 100 mg od from week 28 | 6.83 ± 0.90 | 3.65 ± 0.54 | 6/50 | - | 5/50 | 1/50 | - | 1/50 | 0 | 0 |
Arm 2:50 | No treatment | 6.87 ± 1.67 | 6.88 ± 1.08 | 17/50 | - | 18/50 | 8/50 | - | 8/50 | - | - | |
Han, 2010[22] | Arm 1:52 | 3TC 100 mg od from week 20 | - | - | 5/52 | - | 1/52 | 0/42 | - | 0/42 | 0 | 0 |
Arm 2:61 | 200 IU HBIG every 2 wk from week 28 | - | - | 26/61 | - | 7/61 | 9/55 | - | 9/55 | 0 | 0 | |
Han, 2009[23] | Arm 1:57 | 3TC 100 mg od from week 20 | 7.5 ± 0.50 | - | 6/57 | - | 1/57 | 0/46 | - | 0/46 | 0 | 0 |
Arm 2:66 | 200 IU HBIG every 2 wk from week 28 | 7.5 ± 0.72 | - | 27/66 | - | 8/66 | 10/59 | - | 10/59 | 0 | 1/66 | |
Su, 2009[24] | Arm 1:128 | 3TC 100 mg od from week 32, 200 IU HBIG at week 28, 32, 36 | - | - | - | - | - | 6/128 | - | - | 0 | 0 |
Arm 2:120 | 200 IU HBIG at week 28, 32, 36 | - | - | - | - | - | 17/120 | - | - | - | ||
Xu, 2009[25] | Arm 1:63 | 3TC 100 mg od from week 32 | 9.35 ± 0.21 | 7.71 ± 1.49 | 17/5 | - | 7/56 | 10/56 | - | 11/56 | 7/89 | 10/56 |
Arm 2:62 | Placebo | 9.43 ± 0.21 | 9.34 ± 0.22 | 14/59 | - | 24/59 | 23/59 | - | 27/59 | 6/61 | 12/59 | |
Shi, 2009[26] | Arm 1:49 | 3TC 100 mg od from week 28 | 7.24 ± 1.90 | 4.49 ± 3.25 | 3/49 | - | 1/49 | - | - | - | 2/51 | - |
Arm 2:116 | 100 IU HBIG at week 28, 32, 36 | 6.31 ± 2.13 | 5.86 ± 2.62 | 8/116 | - | 4/116 | - | - | - | 3/146 | - | |
Arm 3:43 | Placebo | 6.40 ± 2.12 | 6.19 ± 2.57 | 10/43 | - | 5/43 | - | - | - | 2/84 | - | |
Yang, 2008[27] | Arm 1:45 | 3TC 100 mg od from week 24 | 6.99 ± 0.84 | 5.10 ± 0.80 | - | - | - | 1/45 | - | - | - | 0 |
Arm 2:42 | 100 IU HBIG at week 28, 32, 36 | 6.87 ± 0.92 | 6.87 ± 0.92 | - | - | - | 6/42 | - | - | - | 0 | |
Guo, 2008[28] | Arm 1:70 | 3TC 100 mg od from week 28 | - | - | 6/70 | - | 8/70 | 4/70 | - | 6/70 | - | - |
Arm 1:40 | No treatment | - | - | 10/40 | - | 13/40 | 12/40 | - | 18/40 | - | - | |
Xiang, 2007[29] | Arm 1:21 | 3TC 100 mg od from week 28 | 8.02 ± 1.15 | 4.58 ± 1.22 | 1/21 | 3/21 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
Arm 2:25 | 200 IU HBIG every month from month 4 | 7.63 ± 1.23 | 5.12 ± 1.07 | 2/25 | 2/25 | - | - | - | - | - | - | |
Arm 3:18 | No treatment | 7.16 ± 0.79 | 6.88 ± 1.36 | 5/18 | 3/18 | - | - | - | - | - | - | |
Feng, 2007[30] | Arm 1:48 | 3TC 100 mg od from week 28 | 8.34 ± 1.23 | 4.85 ± 1.27 | 8/48 | 9/48 | 7/48 | - | 7/48 | 0 | 0 | |
Arm 1:42 | No treatment | 8.26 ± 1.87 | 8.56 ± 1.08 | 17/42 | 19/42 | 16/42 | - | 16/42 | 0 | 0 | ||
Li, 2006[31] | Arm 1:36 | 3TC 100 mg od from week 24 | 6.89 ± 0.82 | 5.08 ± 0.76 | - | - | - | 1/36 | - | - | 0 | 0 |
Arm 2:44 | No treatment | > 5.00 | > 5.00 | - | - | - | 7/44 | - | - | 0 | 0 | |
Li, 2006[32] | Arm 1:40 | 3TC 100 mg od from week 28 and 200 IU HBIG at week 28, 32, 36 | - | - | - | - | - | 1/35 | 1/35 | 1/35 | 0 | 0 |
Arm 2:37 | 200 IU HBIG at week 28, 32, 36 | - | - | - | - | - | 7/32 | 6/32 | 6/32 | 0 | 0 | |
Han, 2005[33] | Arm 1:43 | 3TC 100 mg od from week 28 | 7.15 ± 0.91 | 5.43 ± 0.85 | - | - | - | 0/43 | - | 0/43 | 0 | 0 |
Arm 1:35 | No treatment | > 5.60 | > 5.60 | - | - | - | 5/35 | - | - | 0 | 0 | |
Shi, 2005[34] | Arm 1:21 | 3TC 100 mg od from week 28 | 8.72 ± 0.69 | 6.59 ± 1.06 | 1/21 | 3/21 | 2/21 | - | - | - | 1/21 | 0 |
Arm 1:18 | No treatment | 8.93 ± 1.12 | 9.05 ± 0.26 | 1/18 | 2/18 | 8/18 | - | - | - | 0 | 0 | |
Li, 2003[35] | Arm 1:56 | 200 IU HBIG every 4 wk from week 28 | 7.38 ± 1.17 | 5.28 ± 2.77 | 3/56 | 7/56 | - | - | - | - | 0 | 0 |
Arm 2:43 | 3TC 100 mg od from week 28 | 7.49 ± 0.54 | 5.33 ± 1.34 | 1/43 | 7/43 | - | - | - | - | 0 | 0 | |
Arm 3:52 | No treatment | 7.05 ± 1.29 | 6.23 ± 3.66 | 8/52 | 11/52 | - | - | - | - | 0 | 0 |
First author, year[Ref.] | Generation of allocation sequence | Allocation concealment | Blinding | Methodologicalquality |
Han, 2010[22] | Unclear | Unclear | Unclear | Low |
Zhang, 2010[21] | Unclear | Unclear | Unclear | Low |
Han, 2009[23] | Unclear | Unclear | Unclear | Low |
Su, 2009[24] | Unclear | Unclear | Unclear | Low |
Xu, 2009[25] | Unclear | Adequate | Adequate | High |
Shi, 2009[26] | Adequate | Adequate | Adequate | High |
Yang, 2008[27] | Adequate | Unclear | Unclear | Low |
Guo, 2008[28] | Adequate | Unclear | Unclear | Low |
Xiang, 2007[29] | Adequate | Unclear | Unclear | Low |
Feng, 2007[30] | Not done | Not done | Not done | Low |
Li, 2006[31] | Not done | Not done | Not done | Low |
Li, 2006[32] | Not done | Not done | Not done | Low |
Han, 2005[33] | Not done | Not done | Not done | Low |
Shi, 2005[34] | Adequate | Unclear | Unclear | Low |
Li, 2003[35] | Adequate | Unclear | Unclear | Low |
- Citation: Han L, Zhang HW, Xie JX, Zhang Q, Wang HY, Cao GW. A meta-analysis of lamivudine for interruption of mother-to-child transmission of hepatitis B virus. World J Gastroenterol 2011; 17(38): 4321-4333
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/1007-9327/full/v17/i38/4321.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v17.i38.4321