ArticleClinical and experimental medicine2020
Evaluation of different proton pump inhibitors combined with bismuth quadruple regimens in Helicobacter pylori eradication.
Article in Clinical and experimental medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Therapeutic advances and future directions inFrontiers in microbiology · 2025Review
- 14-day pantoprazole- and amoxicillin-containing high-dose dual therapy forFrontiers in pharmacology · 2023Article
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
To evaluate the efficacy and economics of different proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) combined with bismuth quadruple regimens for Helicobacter pylori (Hp) eradication, a retrospective analysis method was used to collect Hp-positive patients who were treated with a bismuth-containing quadruple regimen (PPIs + amoxicillin + furazolidone + colloid pectin bismuth) from the outpatient department of gastroenterology in our hospital from January to June 2017. A total of 1410 patients were included in the study and divided into four groups according to different PPIs: group A (pantoprazole sodium enteric-coated capsules, 352 cases), group B (esomeprazole magnesium enteric-coated tablets, 462 cases), group C (pantoprazole sodium enteric-coated tablets, 392 cases) and group D (rabeprazole sodium enteric-coated tablets, 204 cases). The eradication rate of Hp and cost-saving in each group were then compared. There were no significant differences of gender (P = 0.526) and age (P = 0.366) between each Hp treatment regimen. The eradication rates of groups A, B, C and D were 91.48%, 89.83%, 86.73% and 90.69%, respectively. No statistical differences of Hp eradication rates were observed between each group yet (P > 0.05). However, the cost of group A was the lowest. In the present study, the Hp eradication rates between different PPIs regimens were similar in treating Hp infection. Nevertheless, the point in favor of pantoprazole capsules is the slightly higher Hp eradication rate and lower drug cost than other PPIs, which provides a significant evidence for the clinical medication decision in treating Hp infection.
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.