ArticleHealth science reports2022
Comparison of eradication rates of moxifloxacin-rifabutin triple therapy and bismuth quadruple therapy as second-line regimens in patients with peptic ulcers.
Article in Health science reports, 2022. 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.
- Review
- 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
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Bismuth quadruple (BQ) therapy is known to have poor patient compliance and a complex dosing method, and no appropriate third-line regimen exists if second-line BQ therapy fails. In Korea, some alternative regimens have shown unsatisfactory eradication rates. Therefore, we investigated the success rates of the second-line moxifloxacin-rifabutin triple (MRT) regimen and compared it with BQ regimen in subgroup analysis of peptic ulcer patients. Materials and Methods: This study was a retrospective study of 71 patients who underwent a second-line MRT for Results: The eradication rate in the MRT group was 69.0% (49/71) in the intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis and 77.8% (49/63) in the per-protocol (PP) analysis. These were significantly lower than the eradication rate in the BQ group (82.5%, Conclusion: Second-line MRT therapy was not as effective as BQ therapy, so it should be considered for limited use only when BQ is not available.
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.