ArticleJournal of gastroenterology2008
Comparison of short- and long-term treatment protocols and the results of second-line quadruple therapy in children with Helicobacter pylori infection.
Article in Journal of gastroenterology, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Third-line rescue therapy with bismuth-containing quadruple regimen after failure of two treatments (with clarithromycin and levofloxacin) for H. pylori infection.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2014Trial
- Optimizing clarithromycin-containing therapy for Helicobacter pylori in the era of antibiotic resistance.World journal of gastroenterology · 2014Review
- Rescue Therapy for Helicobacter pylori Infection 2012.Gastroenterology research and practice · 2012Article
- Bismuth salts in the treatment of Helicobacter pylori infection in children.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2010Article
- Second-line rescue therapy of helicobacter pylori infection.Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology · 2009Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundResearch regarding the optimal therapeutic approach to Helicobacter pylori infection in children is ongoing. There is no consensus as to duration of treatment or second-line therapy. The purpose of this study was compare the efficacy of 7-day and 14-day triple therapies and report the results of second-line quadruple therapy in children.
methodsA total of 275 consecutive H. pylori-infected patients were enrolled into two groups. Group 1 (n = 180) received triple therapy with 14 days of amoxicillin and clarithromycin and 21 days of proton pump inhibitor. Group 2 (n = 95) received triple therapy including 7 days of amoxicillin and clarithromycin with 21 days of proton pump inhibitor. Subsequently, 89 patients not responding to the triple therapies received quadruple therapy comprising omeprazole (14 days), bismuth subcitrate (7 days), doxycycline (7 days), and metronidazole (7 days). Eradication was evaluated by 13C-urea breath test.
resultsThe per-protocol eradication rates in groups 1 and 2 were 60.5% and 55.8%, respectively (P = 0.44). In the second interview with 227 patients, severe symptoms were reported to have disappeared in 59% and decreased notably in 34.8%. Helicobacter pylori was eradicated in 66.7% of patients at the end of the quadruple therapy. In the third interview with 75 patients, severe symptoms had decreased in 38.6% and disappeared in 56%.
conclusionsThe different duration of the two treatment regimens had no impact on eradication rates. Furthermore, quadruple therapy was necessary to achieve H. pylori eradication after triple therapy. However, the eradication rate with quadruple therapy was still insufficient. Consequently, a new therapeutic approach to H. pylori infection in children is needed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
18600386What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.