4.1 Article

Effectiveness of different treatment regimens in helicobacter pylori eradication: Ten-year experience of a single institution

Journal

TURKISH JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY
Volume 21, Issue 3, Pages 218-223

Publisher

AVES
DOI: 10.4318/tjg.2010.0091

Keywords

Helicobacter pylori; eradication

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Aim: We aimed to report the outcomes of different H. pylori eradication regimens used in our institution over the last 10 years. Method: Retrospectively, H. pylori-positive patients who were referred for upper gastrointestinal endoscopy with dyspeptic symptoms and who started eradication treatment and returned for a follow-up visit were included in the study. Subjects were allocated into six groups according to their treatment regimens as follows: Group 1) Proton pump inhibitor, clarithromycin and amoxicillin for 2 weeks; Group 2) Colloidal bismuth subcitrate, metronidazole and tetracycline for 2 weeks; Group 3) ranitidine bismuth citrate, clarithromycin and amoxicillin for 2 weeks; Group 4) Proton pump inhibitor, colloidal bismuth subcitrate, clarithromycin and amoxicillin for 2 weeks; Group 5) Proton pump inhibitor, tetracycline and amoxicillin for 2 weeks; and Group 6) Proton pump inhibitor and amoxicillin for 5 days, followed consecutively by Proton pump inhibitor, clarithromycin and metronidazole for 5 days. A follow-up visit to determine eradication was scheduled a minimum, of 6 weeks after completion of the treatment. Results: In this study, 400 patients were included. Eradication rates were 74.7%, 92.3%, 81.2%, 81.5%, 70.5%, and 66.6% in Groups 1-6, respectively. Conclusion: In Group 1, the eradication rate was lower than 80%. In Groups 34, the eradication rate increased to over 80%. The colloidal bismuth subcitrate, metronidazole and tetracycline regimen (Group 2) was the most successful, with a rate of 92.3%. The eradication rate in the consecutive regimen group (Group 6) did not reach the recommended level (higher than 80-85%).

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available