中国幽门螺杆菌耐药状况以及耐药对治疗的影响—— 全国多中心临床研究

随着幽门螺杆菌（H．pylori）根除治疗的广泛开展，H．pylori对抗生素的耐药率逐年上升，并成为含质子泵抑制剂（PPI）三联疗法根除率下降的主要原因。了解我国H．pylori对抗生素的总体耐药情况，对指导我国临床医师开展H．pylori根除治疗有重要参考价值。目前这方面的资料尚少。目的：了解我国H．pylori对抗生素（甲硝唑、克拉霉素和阿莫西林）的耐药情况以及耐药对三联7d疗法根除H．pylori治疗的影响。方法：采用全国多中心随机对照临床研究。共纳入910例因上消化道症状而接受胃镜检查的H．pylori感染者．所有患者随机分为两个治疗组：LCA组，兰索拉唑30mg bid，克拉霉素500mg bid，阿莫西林1000mg bid；LCM组，兰索拉唑30mg bid，克拉霉素500mg bid，甲硝唑400mg bid。疗程均为7d，均行H．pylori培养。H．pylori分离菌株采用E-test法行甲硝唑、克拉霉素和阿莫西林药敏实验，甲硝唑最低抑菌浓度（MIC）≥8mg／L、克拉霉素MIC≥2mg／L、阿莫西林MIC≥1mg／L判断为耐药。结果：910例患者中，LCA组和LCM组的H．pylori按方案（PP）分析根除率分别为82．7％和68．6％（P〈0．001）。340例H．pylori菌株培养阳性。H．pylori对甲硝唑、克拉霉素和阿莫西林的耐药率分别为75．6％、27．6％和2．7％。LCM组对甲硝唑和克拉霉素均敏感和均耐药菌株的PP根除率分别为84．4％和42．1％（P〈0．001）。LCA组对克拉霉素敏感和耐药菌株的PP根除率分别为91．6％和58．1％（P〈0．001）。结论：中国H．pylori菌株对甲硝唑和克拉霉素的耐药率均较高．对阿莫西林的耐药率较低。H．pylori对抗生素耐药是导致根除治疗失败的主要原因。     

功能性消化不良患者中以铋剂为基础的治疗方案根除幽门螺杆菌疗效和安全性研究

背景在功能性消化不良(FD)患者中,以铋剂为基础的治疗方案根除幽门螺杆菌(H.pylori)的疗效优于以质子泵抑制剂(PPI)为基础的治疗方案.目的观察在常规1周三联疗法结束后继续单独应用胶体次枸橼酸铋(CBS)3周对H.pylori根除率的影响,评估以铋剂为基础的治疗方案在FD患者中根除H.pylori的疗效和安全性.方法165例H.pylori阳性FD患者随机分为3组,治疗方案分别为A组CBS 220 mg bid 7天、克拉霉素250 mg bid 7天和呋喃唑酮100mg bid 7天;B组CBS 220 mg bid 28天、克拉霉素250 mg bid 7天和呋喃唑酮100mg bid 7天;C组法莫替丁20 mg bid 7天、CBS 220 mg bid 7天、克拉霉素250 mg bid 7天和呋喃唑酮100mg bid 7天.H.pylori阳性由快速尿素酶试验结合组织学检查证实.疗程结束后4～6周行13C-尿素呼气试验以判断H.pylori是否已根除.结果3种治疗方案均获得较好的疗效,按意图治疗(ITT)[方案(PP)]分析,H.pylori总根除率达87.3%(90.0%),B组和C组的根除率分别为89.1%(94.2%)和92.7%(94.4%),均较A组的80.0%(81.5%)提高约10%(P＜0.05).3组总的副反应发生情况无显著差异.结论3种以铋剂为基础的治疗方案在FD患者中均能有效根除H.pylori,且安全性较高.在常规以铋剂为基础的1周三联疗法结束后继续单独应用铋剂3周,或在三联疗法的基础上加用H2受体拮抗剂的四联方案,均能进一步提高H.pylori的根除率.     

评估以雷贝拉唑为基础的三联和四联方案根除幽门螺杆菌的疗效

背景：在标准三联方案对幽门螺杆菌（H.pylori）感染根除率有所下降的情况下，首选含铋剂的四联方案是否较标准三联方案更具优势？目的：比较以雷贝拉唑为基础的标准三联方案和再加铋剂的四联方案对H.pylori感染者进行初次根除治疗的疗效。方法：65例内镜诊断为非溃疡性消化不良的H.pylori感染者随机分配至三联组（雷贝拉唑10mg bid＋克拉霉素500mg bid＋阿莫西林1．0g bid）和四联组（上述三联药物加胶体次枸橼酸铋220mg bid），连服7天。治疗结束后至少间隔4周复查^13C-尿素呼气试验检测H.pylori，评估治疗结果。结果：60例患者按方案完成治疗。三联组和四联组H．prlori根除率按意图治疗（ITT）分析分别为71．9％和75．8％，按方案（PP）分析分别为76．7％和83．3％，两组间根除率无显著差异（P〉0．05）。除四联组中有2例分别因头晕和上腹痛而未完成治疗外，两组其余患者的不良反应相似，且能耐受，停药后不良反应自行消失。结论：含雷贝拉唑、克拉霉素和阿莫西林的一周三联治疗方案与再加铋剂的四联方案均能有效根除H.pylori，加用铋剂并未显著提高H.pylori的根除率，提示首次根除H.pylori治疗时仍应选择含质子泵抑制剂和两种抗生素的三联方案。     

含铋剂和克拉霉素的四联根除方案在幽门螺杆菌一线治疗中的作用

背景：近年经典三联方案对幽门螺杆菌（H.pylori）感染的根除疗效明显下降,建立新型、安全和高效的一线标准治疗方案是临床工作的当务之急。目的：评估含铋剂和克拉霉素的四联方案作为H.pylori一线治疗方案的疗效和安全性。方法：120例胃镜诊断为非溃疡性消化不良的H.pylori感染患者随机分为3组：7 d三联组（奥美拉唑20 mgbid＋阿莫西林1000 mg bid＋克拉霉素500 mg bid,疗程7 d）、7 d四联组（7 d三联方案＋枸橼酸铋钾220 mg bid,疗程7 d）和2周四联组（方案同7 d四联组,疗程2周）。治疗结束后至少4周行13C-尿素呼气试验以评估根除疗效。H.pylori分离菌株行克拉霉素、甲硝唑和阿莫西林药敏试验。结果：115例患者按方案完成治疗。7 d三联组、7 d四联组和2周四联组按意向治疗（ITT）分析H.pylori根除率分别为70.0%、75.0%和90.0%,按方案（PP）分析分别为73.7%、76.9%和94.7%。2周四联组ITT和PP根除率均显著高于7 d三联组（P〈0.05）,PP根除率显著高于7 d四联组（P=0.026）,而7 d三联组ITT和PP根除率与7 d四联组相比均无明显差异。H.pylori对克拉霉素、甲硝唑和阿莫西林的耐药率分别为24.2%、48.3%和0%,7 d三联组、7 d四联组和2周四联组对克拉霉素耐药菌株的根除率逐渐升高（37.5%、55.6%、80.0%）,但差异无统计学意义。除2周四联组中1例患者因皮肤过敏而未完成治疗外,其余患者的不良反应相似且轻微,耐受性良好。结论：含铋剂和克拉霉素的2周四联方案可明显提高H.pylori根除疗效,且安全性较高,可作为H.pylori一线治疗的标准方案。     

质子泵抑制剂四联疗法作为幽门螺杆菌根除治疗一线方案的临床研究

背景：随着幽门螺杆菌（H．pylori）对抗生素耐药率的上升，传统一线治疗方案质子泵抑制剂（PPI）三联疗法的根除率逐渐下降。临床上需要新的一线治疗方案以提高H．pylori感染的初治成功率。目的：评价PPI四联1周疗法作为H．pylori根除治疗一线方案的疗效和安全性。方法：符合入选标准的H．pylori感染患者随机分为A1组（LCAB方案：兰索拉唑30mg＋克拉霉素250mg＋阿莫西林1．0g＋枸橼酸铋钾220mg，b．i．d．）、A2组（LCMB方案：兰索拉唑30mg＋克拉霉素250mg＋甲硝唑400mg＋枸橼酸铋钾220mg，b、i．d．）和B1组（LCA方案：兰索拉唑30mg＋克拉霉素500mg＋阿莫西林1、0g，b．i．d．）、B2组（LCM方案：兰索拉唑30mg＋克拉霉素500mg＋甲硝唑400mg，b．i．d、）。各组疗程均为1周。记录治疗期间发生的不良反应。疗程结束4周后以快速尿素酶试验、组织学或^13C-尿素呼气试验判断H．pylori根除情况。结果：共145例患者纳入研究。A组按方案（PP）分析H．pylori根除率显著高于B组（91．9％对79．2％，P〈0．05），意向治疗（ITT）根除率则与B组无显著差异（83．8％对74．0％，P〉0．05）。A1组PP和ITT根除率分别为93．8％和85．7％，A2组分别为90．0％和81．8％；B1组分别为79．4％和75．0％，B2组分别为78．9％和73．2％。A1与A2组比较，B1与B2组比较，差异均无统计学意义（P〉0．05）。各组均未见明显不良反应。结论：PPI四联1周疗法用于H．pylori感染的初治，疗效明显高于PPI三联1周疗法，是一种可供选择的一线治疗方案。     

以泮托拉唑为基础的三联和四联疗法根除幽门螺杆菌疗效比较——一项单中心、随机、开放、平行对照研究

背景：近年质子泵抑制剂（PPI）＋阿莫西林＋克拉霉素标准三联疗法对幽门螺杆菌（H.pylori）的根除率有所降低,PPI＋铋剂＋甲硝唑＋四环素的四联疗法能否成为一线治疗的首选以及适当延长疗程能否提高根除率尚有待明确。目的：比较以泮托拉唑为基础的7d标准三联疗法与7d、10d四联疗法根除H.pylori的疗效。方法：133例非溃疡性消化不良的H.pylori感染患者随机分配至7d三联组（45例,泮托拉唑40mgbid＋阿莫西林1.0gbid＋克拉霉素500mgbid,PAC方案）以及7d、10d四联组（43例和45例,泮托拉唑40mgbid＋枸橼酸铋钾220mgbid＋甲硝唑400mgtid＋四环素750mgbid,PBMT方案）。治疗结束后至少间隔4周行13C-尿素呼气试验复查H.pylori,评估治疗结果。结果：共129例患者按方案完成治疗。三组H.pylori根除率按意图治疗（ITT）分析分别为73.3%、79.1%和88.9%,按方案（PP）分析分别为75.0%、82.9%和90.9%。7dPAC方案的PP根除率显著低于10dPBMT方案（P〈0.05）。除四联组中有2例患者分别因头晕和腹泻而未完成治疗外,其余患者的不良反应相似且均能耐受。结论：在7d标准三联疗法H.pylori根除疗效降低的情况下,含泮托拉唑、铋剂、甲硝唑和四环素的10d四联疗法可考虑作为根除治疗的首选方案。     

几种幽门螺杆菌感染根除治疗方案的疗效及其费用-效果分析

目的观察几种幽门螺旋杆菌（Hp）根除治疗方案的疗效及经济学意义。方法185例胃镜证实诊断的患者，经胃窦黏膜活检病理组织学及^14C-尿素呼气试验（^14C—UBT）均呈阳性者定为Hp感染，治疗停药4周后复查^14C—UBT，阴性则定为Hp根除；回顾性的把这些患者分为A、B、C、D、E、F六个治疗方案组，A组（n=49，奥美拉唑20mg＋阿莫西林1000mg＋甲硝唑400mg，bid，疗程7天），B组（n=31，奥美拉唑20mg＋阿莫西林1000mg＋克拉霉素500mg，bid，疗程7天），C组（n=61，奥美拉唑20mg＋阿莫西林1000mg＋甲硝唑400mg＋果胶铋300mg，hid，疗程7天），D组（n=14，奥美拉唑20mg＋阿莫西林1000mg＋呋喃唑酮100mg＋果胶铋300mg，bid，疗程7天），E组（n=20，阿莫西林1000mg＋甲硝唑400mg＋果胶铋300mg，bid，疗程14天）和F组（n=10，前5天奥美拉唑20mg＋阿莫西林1000mg，后5天奥美拉唑20mg＋克拉霉素500mg＋甲硝唑400mg，bid，疗程共10天）；并对各组的疗效以及费用-效果进行分析。结果各组间Hp根除率不全相同（P〈0．05），其中D、E二组根除率为100％，依次为C组91．8％、F组80．0％、A组79．6％和B组77．4％；费用一效果分析提示，A组费用虽少，但疗效较差，D、C和E组费用适中，根除率高，F组和B组费用最高，根除率最低。结论含果胶铋的Hp根除方案根除率高，D组为Hp根除治疗的最佳方案，E组、C组与D组疗效相仿，依次为A组，F组和B组。     

十二指肠溃疡患者根除幽门螺杆菌后抑酸维持治疗的疗效研究

背景：对感染幽门螺杆菌（H.pylori）的消化性溃疡患者成功根除且H.ylori后,是否应继续行抑酸治疗,目前尚存在争议。目的：探讨合并H.pylori感染的十二指肠溃疡（DU）患者根除H.pylori后抑酸维持治疗的疗效。方法：112例合并H.pylori感染的DU患者随机分为A组和B组,A组给予10d四联疗法：兰索拉唑30mg＋阿莫西林1g＋克拉霉素0．5gbid＋枸橼酸铋钾110mg qid,疗程10d。B组：在A组方案的基础上,疗程结束后再予兰索拉唑30mg,1次／d,维持4周。治疗结束4周后复查胃镜,评估H.pylori根除疗效、溃疡愈合率和腹痛缓解率。结果：109例患者完成方案。A、B两组按意向治疗（ITT）和按方案（PP）分析的H.pylori根除率（ITT：85．7％对87．5％;PP：88．9％对89．1％）和溃疡愈合率（ITT：87．5％对94．6％;PP：90．7％对96．4％）以及腹痛缓解率（95．6％对95．7％）相比差异均无统计学意义（P〉0．05）。结论：以10d四联疗法根除H.pylori后,可使多数DU患者的溃疡愈合,无需进一步行维持抑酸治疗。     

上海市青浦区幽门螺杆菌抗生素耐药情况的研究

背景：幽门螺杆菌（H．pylori）对抗生素的耐药率在世界范围内呈上升趋势,但存在地域差异。目的：调查上海市青浦区H．pylori对5种根除治疗方案中常用抗生素的耐药情况。方法：选取青浦区两所医院因上消化道症状行胃镜检查、快速尿素酶试验阳性并符合纳入和排除标准的患者,取胃窦黏膜分离培养H．pylori．采用Kirby-Bauer纸片扩散法行药敏试验。结果：成功分离培养出120株H．pylori临床菌株,对甲硝唑、阿莫西林、克拉霉素、左氧氟沙星和呋喃唑酮的耐药率分别为82．5％、22．5％、36．7％、41．7％和0．8％。耐药率与患者性别无关;慢性胃炎菌株对左氧氟沙星的耐药率显著高于十二指肠溃疡菌株（P〈0．05）。60．8％的菌株对两种以及两种以上抗生素联合耐药。结论：青浦区H．pylori对甲硝唑、阿莫西林、克拉霉素、左氧氟沙星的耐药情况相当严重且多重耐药率高。初次根除治疗失败后．再次治疗时可在药敏试验指导下选择有效抗生素。呋喃唑酮可作为当地根除治疗方案的一线用药．     

含多西环素的四联方案补救治疗幽门螺杆菌初次根除失败的临床研究

幽门螺杆菌（H．pylori）一线三联疗法的根除失败率日益增高。目的：评价含多西环素的四联方案补救治疗H．pylori初次根除失败的有效性和安全性。方法：共纳入37例日．pyZo打初次根除失败的消化性溃疡、慢性萎缩性胃炎或非溃疡性消化不良患者,予四联方案埃索美拉唑（20rag）＋枸橼酸铋钾（220mg）＋多西环素（100mg）＋阿莫西林（1000mg）,2次／dx10d。治疗结束4周后行”^13C-尿素呼气试验（UBT）以评估H．pylori根除情况。结果：4例患者失访,25例患者补救治疗成功,8例失败,补救治疗意向治疗（ITT）分析和符合方案（PP）分析根除率分别为67．6％和75．8％。21例（63．6％）患者发生轻微不良反应。结论：含多西环素的四联方案是一种安全、有效的H．pylori初次根除失败后的补救治疗方案。     

序贯疗法与标准四联疗法对幽门螺杆菌根除失败后补救治疗的疗效分析

近年经典三联疗法的幽门螺杆菌（11．pylori）根除疗效明显降低,选择有效补救疗法对Hpylori根除失败者有重要意义。目的：比较序贯疗法与标准四联疗法对且pylori根除失败者的疗效。方法：将98例Hpylori根除失败者随机分为序贯疗法组（前5d予奥美拉唑20mg＋阿莫西林1000mgbid,后5d予奥美拉唑20mg＋左氧氟沙星200mg＋克拉霉素500mgbid）和标准四联疗法组（予奥美拉唑20mg＋胶体次枸橼酸铋钾220mg＋阿莫西林1000mg＋克拉霉素500mgbid,疗程7d）。停药4周后复查”C一尿素呼气试验,评估Hpylori根除疗效。结果：共95例患者完成方案,序贯疗法组11Tr和PP分析的Hpylori根除率均显著高于标准四联疗法组（ITF：89．8％对71,4％,PP：91．7％对74。5％,P〈0．05）,序贯疗法组临床症状改善的总有效率亦显著高于标准四联疗法组（95．8％对80．9％,P〈0．05）,两组不良反应发生率无明显差异（P〉0．05）。结论：对Hpylori根除治疗失败的患者,序贯疗法和标准四联疗法均可作为有效的补救治疗方案,但10d序贯疗法的疗效优于7d标准四联疗法。     

Effectiveness of triple therapy and quadruple therapy for Helicobacter pylori eradication]

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Quadruple therapy can be considered as a first-line therapy in areas where the resistance rate to clarithromycin is high. Comparison study of triple therapy and quadruple therapy for Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) eradication is still lacking in Korea despite the increasing prevalence of antibiotic resistance. This study was conducted to compare the efficacy of triple and quadruple therapy as a first-line treatment in H. pylori infected patients with peptic ulcer. METHODS: Consecutive 149 cases of peptic ulcer disease associated with H. pylori infection were randomized either to proton pump inhibitor (PPI, bid), amoxicillin (1,000 mg, bid), and clarithromycin (500 mg, bid) (PAC group) or to PPI (bid), bismuth subcitrate (300 mg, qid), metronidazole (500 mg, tid), and tetracycline (500 mg, qid) (PBMT group) eradication treatments for 7 days. Outcome of eradication therapy was assessed by 13C-urea breath test performed 4-6 weeks after eradication. RESULTS: Eradication rates in PAC and PBMT group were 78.7% (59/75) and 71.6% (53/74) by intention to treat analysis, respectively (p=0.424). By per protocol analysis, eradication rates of PAC and PBMT group were 85.5% (59/69) and 85.5% (53/62), respectively (p=1.012). Adverse reactions occurred in 5 (6.6%) and 7 (9.5%) patients in PAC and PBMT group, respectively (p=0.346). CONCLUSIONS: One week-quadruple therapy as a first-line treatment for H. pylori infection does not offer any advantage over PPI-based triple therapy in Korean patients.     

The efficacy of levofloxacin based triple therapy for Helicobacter pylori eradication]

BACKGROUND/AIMS: The failure rates of first and second line therapies of Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) eradication range from 15 to 20%. This study was aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of levofloxacin based triple therapy compared with standard triple or quadruple therapy for H. pylori eradication in Korea. METHODS: We enrolled two hundred and sixty seven patients with presence of H. pylori infection. One hundred and forty-one patients were treated with levofloxacin based triple therapy (LAP; levofloxacin, amoxicillin, proton pump inhibitor; PPI), and 126 patients were treated with standard triple therapy (CAP; clarithromycin, amoxicillin, PPI). We retreated the patients who had failed in H. pylori eradication with standard quadruple second-line therapy (MTPB; metronidazole, tetracycline, PPI, bismuth subcitrate) or levofloxacin based therapy (LAP or LCP; levofloxacin, clarithromycin, PPI). RESULTS: In first line therapy of H. pylori eradication, the eradication rates of levofloxacin based triple therapy and standard triple therapy were 69.8% and 74.0% respectively (p=0.52). In second-line therapy, the eradication rate of levofloxacin based triple therapy and standard quadruple therapy were 62.5% and 40.0% respectively (p=0.34). CONCLUSIONS: Levofloxacin based triple therapy is effective as standard regimen to eradicate H. pylori infection and is useful for an alternative rescue therapy as well.     

3种幽门螺杆菌根除方案和抗生素耐药对其根除率的影响

背景:目前推荐的根除幽门螺杆菌(H.pylori)的治疗方案因H.pylori对大环内酯类和硝基咪唑类抗生素的耐药性快速增加而不能令人满意。目的:评估以质子泵抑制剂(PPI)为基础或以H2受体拮抗剂(H2RA)加铋剂为基础的三联或四联疗法根除H.pylori的疗效和安全性,评估H.pylori的耐药性及其对根除率的影响。方法:120例H.pylori感染的愈合期十二指肠球部溃疡或非溃疡性消化不良患者随机分入3个治疗组,疗程7天。A组:奥美拉唑、克拉霉素和替硝唑;B组:法莫替丁、枸橼酸铋钾、克拉霉素和替硝唑;C组:法莫替丁、枸橼酸铋钾、呋喃唑酮和四环素。根除治疗前取胃窦黏膜活检组织行快速尿素酶试验、H.pylori培养和组织学检查评估H.pylori感染状态。治疗结束后4～6周,采用13C-尿素呼气试验评估H.pylori根除情况。琼脂扩散法药物敏感试验测定抗生素的最小抑菌浓度(MIC)。结果:所有患者均完成治疗和随访。A组、B组和C组的H.pylori根除率分别为80%(32/40)、85％(34/40)和90％(36/40),3组间无显著差异(P>0.05)。耐药菌株与敏感菌株的H.pylori根除率有显著差异。结论:以PPI为基础或以H2RA加铋剂为基础的三联或四联疗法对H.pylori具有较高的根除率。H.py-lori的耐药性是影响根除率的主要因素。     

10d含呋喃唑酮三联、四联疗法补救治疗幽门螺杆菌感染的比较研究

背景:近年随着抗菌药物的耐药率逐渐上升,标准三联疗法对幽门螺杆菌(Hp)的根除率不断下降。目的:比较含呋喃唑酮的三联、四联疗法补救治疗Hp阳性慢性胃炎患者的疗效和安全性。方法:选取标准三联疗法(质子泵抑制剂+阿莫西林+克拉霉素或甲硝唑)根除失败的Hp阳性病例80例,将患者随机分为对照组和治疗组。对照组患者给予埃索美拉唑20 mg bid+阿莫西林1 g bid+呋喃唑酮0.1 g bid,疗程10 d;治疗组给予埃索美拉唑20 mg bid+阿莫西林1 g bid+呋喃唑酮0.1 g bid+枸橼酸铋钾220 mg bid,疗程10 d。治疗结束至少4周后行14C-尿素呼气试验,评估Hp根除率、症状缓解情况和不良反应。结果:与对照组相比,治疗组PP分析和ITT分析Hp根除率均显著升高(PP:94.7%对73.7%,P=0.012;ITT:90.0%对70.0%,P=0.025),症状缓解率显著升高(92.1%对65.8%,P0.05),而不良反应发生率无明显差异(12.5%对10.0%,P0.05)。结论:含呋喃唑酮的四联疗法对Hp根除失败者的疗效明显高于三联疗法,且不良反应无明显增加,可作为一线方案用于临床根除Hp。     

Furazolidone, amoxicillin, bismuth and rabeprazole quadruple rescue therapy for the eradication of Helicobacterpylori

AIM： To compare the efficacy and side effect profiles of three furazolidone and amoxicillin-based quadruple rescue therapies for the eradication of Helicobacter pylori （H pylonS. METHODS： Patients who failed in the Hpylori eradication therapy for at least one course were randomly allocated into three groups. Group A received rebaprazole 10 mg＋ amoxicillin 1 g ＋ furazolidone 100 mg, and bismuth subcitrate 220 mg, twice daily for 1 wk; group B received the same regimen of group A but for 2 wk; and group C received the same regimen of group B, but furazolidone was replaced by furazolidone 100 mg three times daily. To record the side effect profiles at the end of the treatment, Hpylori eradication was assessed with 13C-urea breath test 4 wk after therapy. RESULTS： Sixty patients were enrolled including 28 males, and 20 patients in each group. The average age of the patients was 49.2 years, ranging from 18 to 84 years. H pylori eradication rates with per-protocol analysis were 82%, 89% and 90% in the three groups, respectively. Side effects were found in 11 patients, including mild dizziness, nausea, diarrhea and increased bowel movement. None of the 11 patients needed treatment for their side effects. CONCLUSION： One- or two-week furazolidone and amoxicillin-based quadruple rescue therapy with a low dose furazolidone （100 mg bid） for the eradication of Hpylori is effective. Extending the antibiotic course to 14 d could improve the eradication rates.     

Comparison of the effectiveness of quadruple salvage regimen for Helicobacter pylori infection according to the duration of treatment]

BACKGROUND/AIMS: At present, triple therapy schemes are recommended by national and international consensus conferences for the treatment of Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) infection. However, even with the most effective current treatment regimens, about 10-20% of patients fail to eradicate H. pylori, necessitating alternative strategy to eradicate H. pylori in primary treatment failure. Therefore, we performed this study to evaluate the efficacy of quadruple therapy and to compare 1 and 2-week quadruple regimen as a second-line therapy. METHODS: The hospital records of 155 patients who failed to the standard triple therapy (proton pump inhibitor, amoxicillin, clarithromycin) were reviewed retrospectively, and divided the 1 or 2 weeks OBMT regimen (omeprazole 20 mg bid, bismuth salt 120 mg qid, metronidazole 500 mg tid, tetracycline 500 mg qid). Presence of H. pylori infection and side-effects of the treatment regimen were assessed 4 weeks after the cessation of treatment. RESULTS: One hundred and eight male and 47 female (mean age, 52.2+/-15.4) patients were enrolled. The overall eradication rate of H. pylori with quadruple therapy was 83.9% and the eradication rate was similar between 1 and 2 weeks of OBMT regimen (76.8% in OBMT 1 week, 87.9% in OBMT 2 weeks, respectively p=0.110). CONCLUSIONS: Quadruple therapy is an effective salvage regimen for H. pylori eradication after the failure of standard triple therapy. One week quadruple therapy is not significantly different from 2-weeks regimen as the second-line option for H. pylori eradication.     

Levofloxacin-azithromycin combined triple therapy for Helicobacter pylori eradication]

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Antibiotic resistance and poor compliance are the main causes of Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) eradication failure. This study evaluated the eradication rate, tolerability, and compliance of levofloxacin- azithromycin combined triple therapy for H. pylori eradication. METHODS: 1) First-line eradication: A total of 78 H. pylori-positive patients were enrolled. Seventeen military men in Armed Forces Capital Hospital were treated with 7 days of levofloxacin-azithromycin combined triple therapy (omeprazole 20 mg bid, levofloxacin 500 mg od, and azithromycin 500 mg od), and 61 patients in Kangbuk Samsung Hospital were treated with standard PPI-based triple therapy (omeprazole 20 mg bid, amoxicillin 1.0 g bid, and clarithromycin 500 mg bid) for 7 days. 2) Second-line eradication: A consecutive series of 59 patients who failed H. pylori eradication with standard PPI-based triple therapy in Kangbuk Samsung Hospital were randomized to two groups. Thirty patients were retreated with 7 days of bismuth-based quadruple therapy (omeprazole 20 mg bid, bismuth 120 mg qid, metronidazole 500 mg tid, and tetracycline 500 mg qid), and remaining 29 patients were retreated with levofloxacin-azithromycin combined triple therapy. Patient's compliance and tolerability were evaluated at the end of treatment. The status of H. pylori infection was assessed 8 weeks later then. The successful eradication of H. pylori was defined as negative results from histology and CLO test, or 13C-urea breath test. RESULTS: First-line eradication rate of levofloxacin-azithromycin triple therapy was lower than that of standard PPI-based triple therapy, but there was no statistically significant difference (70.6% vs. 80.3%, p=0.390). Second-line eradication rate of levofloxacin-azithromycin combined triple therapy was significantly lower than that of bismuth-based quadruple therapy (ITT/PP 65.5%/73.1% vs. 90%/90%, p<0.0001). The compliances of all patients were more than 85%. Two of patients with levofloxacin-azithromycin combined triple therapy complained self-limiting side effects (mild dizziness; mild insomnia with general weakness). CONCLUSIONS: Levofloxacin-azithromycin combined triple therapy should not be recommended as the first-line or second-line H. pylori eradication regimen in Korea.