Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40304303›Full record

Observational studyChinese medical journal2025

The interval of rescue treatment does not affect the efficacy and safety of Helicobacter pylori eradication: A prospective multicenter observational study.

Minjuan Lin, Junnan Hu, Jing Liu, Juan Wang, Zhongxue Han, Xiaohong Wang, Zhenzhen Zhai, Yanan Yu, Wenjie Yuan, Wen Zhang and 11 more

Registry-linked trialAbstract readMulticenter StudyObservational Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Observational study in Chinese medical journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05173493 (The Study About the Selection of Time for Retreatment of Helicobacter Pylori After Eradication Failure), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT05173493 completednot on this map

The Study About the Selection of Time for Retreatment of Helicobacter Pylori After Eradication Failure

TypeobservationalSponsorShandong UniversityRan2021 to 2023Enrolled670ConditionsHelicobacter Pylori InfectionArmsAmoxicillin,Furazolidone, Amoxicillin,Levofloxacin, Tetracycline,Furazolidone
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

21 authors.

Minjuan LinDepartment of Gastroenterology, Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Jinan, Shandong 250012, China.
Junnan HuDepartment of Gastroenterology, Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Jinan, Shandong 250012, China.
Jing LiuDepartment of Gastroenterology, Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Jinan, Shandong 250012, China.
Juan WangDepartment of Gastroenterology, Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Jinan, Shandong 250012, China.
Zhongxue HanDepartment of Gastroenterology, Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Jinan, Shandong 250012, China.
Xiaohong WangDepartment of Gastroenterology, The Affiliated Taian City Centeral Hospital of Qingdao University, Taian, Shandong 271000, China.
Zhenzhen ZhaiDepartment of Gastroenterology, Qilu Hospital of Shandong University Dezhou Hospital, Dezhou, Shandong 253000, China.
Yanan YuDepartment of Gastroenterology, The Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University, Qingdao, Shandong 266000, China.
Wenjie YuanDepartment of Gastroenterology, The Affiliated Hospital of Shandong Second Medical University, Weifang, Shandong 261031, China.
Wen ZhangDepartment of Gastroenterology, Shengli Oilfield Central Hospital, Dongying, Shandong 257034, China.
Zhi WangDepartment of Internal Medicine, Maternity and Child Care Center of Dezhou, Dezhou, Shandong 253011, China.
Qingzhou KongDepartment of Gastroenterology, Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Jinan, Shandong 250012, China.
Boshen LinDepartment of Gastroenterology, Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Jinan, Shandong 250012, China.
Yuming DingDepartment of Gastroenterology, Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Jinan, Shandong 250012, China.
Meng WanDepartment of Gastroenterology, Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Jinan, Shandong 250012, China.
Wenlin ZhangDepartment of Gastroenterology, Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Jinan, Shandong 250012, China.
Miao DuanDepartment of Gastroenterology, Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Jinan, Shandong 250012, China.
Shuyan ZengDepartment of Gastroenterology, Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Jinan, Shandong 250012, China.
Yueyue LiDepartment of Gastroenterology, Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Jinan, Shandong 250012, China.
Xiuli ZuoDepartment of Gastroenterology, Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Jinan, Shandong 250012, China.
Yanqing LiDepartment of Gastroenterology, Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Jinan, Shandong 250012, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe effect of the interval between previous Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) eradication and rescue treatment on therapeutic outcomes remains unknown. The aim of this study was to investigate the association between eradication rates and treatment interval durations in H. pylori infections.

methodsThis prospective observational study was conducted from December 2021 to February 2023 at six tertiary hospitals in Shandong, China. We recruited patients who were positive for H. pylori infection and required rescue treatment. Demographic information, previous times of eradication therapy, last eradication therapy date, and history of antibiotic use data were collected. The patients were divided into four groups based on the rescue treatment interval length: Group A, ≥4 weeks and ≤3 months; Group B, >3 and ≤6 months; Group C, >6 and ≤12 months; and Group D, >12 months. The primary outcome was the eradication rate of H. pylori . Drug compliance and adverse events (AEs) were also assessed. Pearson's χ2 test or Fisher's exact test was used to compare eradication rates between groups.

resultsA total of 670 patients were enrolled in this study. The intention-to-treat (ITT) eradication rates were 88.3% (158/179) in Group A, 89.6% (120/134) in Group B, 89.1% (123/138) in Group C, and 87.7% (192/219) in Group D. The per-protocol (PP) eradication rates were 92.9% (156/168) in Group A, 94.5% (120/127) in Group B, 94.5% (121/128) in Group C, and 93.6% (190/203) in Group D. There was no statistically significant difference in the eradication rates between groups in either the ITT ( P = 0.949) or PP analysis ( P = 0.921). No significant differences were observed in the incidence of AEs ( P = 0.934) or drug compliance ( P = 0.849) between groups.

conclusionThe interval duration of rescue treatment had no significant effect on H. pylori eradication rates or the incidence of AEs. REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT05173493.

Indexed as

Anti-Bacterial AgentsHelicobacter InfectionsHelicobacter pyloriAdultAgedFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedProspective StudiesProton Pump InhibitorsTreatment OutcomeAnti-Bacterial AgentsProton Pump InhibitorsQuadruple therapyRescue treatmentSalvage therapyTime factors

Identifiers

PMID40304303
PMCPMC12180818

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

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.