ArticleThe Korean journal of gastroenterology = Taehan Sohwagi Hakhoe chi2019
Effect of 7-day Bismuth Quadruple Therapy versus 14-day Moxifloxacin Triple Therapy for Second-line
Article in The Korean journal of gastroenterology = Taehan Sohwagi Hakhoe chi, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of eradication rates of moxifloxacin-rifabutin triple therapy and bismuth quadruple therapy as second-line regimens in patients with peptic ulcers.Health science reports · 2022Article
- Article
- BestAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
aimsBoth bismuth-containing quadruple therapy and moxifloxacin-containing triple therapy have been suggested as second-line eradication therapy for
methodsFrom January 2011 to December 2015, a total of 569 patients who failed to respond to first-line triple therapy and who subsequently received second-line 7-RBMT or 14-EAM were retrospectively enrolled. The eradication rates were identified using per-protocol (PP) analysis.
resultsA total of 487 and 82 patients received 7-RBMT and 14-EAM, respectively. PP eradication rates were 93.6% (366/391; 95% CI, 91.0-95.9%) with 7-RBMT and 73.8% (48/65; 95% CI, 63.1-84.6%) with14-EAM (p<0.001). Therefore, the eradication rates with 7-RBMT were significantly higher than with 14-EAM according to the PP analysis. The adverse event rate was 17.1% (67/391) with 7-RBMT and 7.7% (5/65) with 14-EAM (p=0.065). In terms of risk factors, multivariate analysis revealed that 14-EAM (OR, 5.47; 95% CI, 2.74-10.93) was related to
conclusions7-RBMT may be an effective second-line therapy in patients who failed to respond to first-line triple therapy in Korea, where there is a high prevalence of
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.