Di Mario Francesco, Cavallaro Lucas G, Scarpignato Carmelo
Section of Gastroenterology, Department of Clinical Sciences, School of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Parma, Parma, Italy.
Dig Dis. 2006;24(1-2):113-30. doi: 10.1159/000090315.
Helicobacter pylori infection is the main cause of gastritis, gastroduodenal ulcer and gastric cancer and should be considered as a major public health issue. According to several international guidelines, first-line therapy for treating H. pylori infection consists of proton pump inhibitor (PPI) or ranitidine bismuth citrate (RBC) with any two antibiotics of amoxicillin, clarithromycin or metronidazole given for 7-14 days. However, even with the recommended treatment regimens, approximately 20% of patients will fail to obtain H. pylori eradication. The proportion of patients with first-line H. pylori therapy failure may be higher in clinical practice and it may increase thanks to diffusion of H. pylori treatment. The recommended second-line therapy is the quadruple regimen composed by tetracycline, metronidazole, bismuth salts and a PPI. However, the efficacy of this regimen is limited by poor patient's compliance due to its side effects, number of tablets per day, and long duration. Moreover, bismuth and metronidazole are not available in all countries. Alternatively, a longer-lasting (i.e. 10-14 days) PPI or RBC triple therapy with two antibiotics has generally been used. In an empirical strategy, the choice of second line depends on the treatment initially used. If a clarithromycin-based regimen was administered in first line, a quadruple regimen or PPI (or RBC) triple therapy with metronidazole and amoxicillin (or tetracycline) should be suggested as a second line. In case of second-line treatment failure, the patient should be evaluated by a case-by-case approach. A susceptibility-guided strategy, if available, is recommended in order to choose the best third-line treatment. Culture can reveal the presence of H. pylori-sensitive strains to clarithromycin (the best effective) or other antimicrobials (such as amoxicillin, metronidazole and tetracycline). Conversely, in an empirical strategy, a third-line not yet used therapy, can reach a high success rate. PPI or RBC, amoxicillin and a new antimicrobial (e.g. rifabutin, levofloxacin or furazolidone) could be used. Several studies have obtained relatively good results with triple therapy combining PPI, rifabutin, and amoxicillin, although a reversible myelotoxicity as leukopenia and thrombocytopenia has been described. Preliminary good results were also achieved with triples PPI regimens combining levofloxacin and amoxicillin without important adverse effects. Furazolidone has also shown efficacy for H. pylori eradication, although untoward reactions could limit its use, especially when high doses are employed. Finally, in more than one H. pylori treatment failure, non-antimicrobial add-on medications (such as lactoferrin, probiotics and others) could be used with the aim either to improve the eradication rate or to minimize side effects.
幽门螺杆菌感染是胃炎、胃十二指肠溃疡和胃癌的主要病因,应被视为一个重大的公共卫生问题。根据多项国际指南,治疗幽门螺杆菌感染的一线疗法包括质子泵抑制剂(PPI)或枸橼酸铋雷尼替丁(RBC),并联合阿莫西林、克拉霉素或甲硝唑这三种抗生素中的任意两种,疗程为7 - 14天。然而,即便采用推荐的治疗方案,仍有约20%的患者无法根除幽门螺杆菌。在临床实践中,一线幽门螺杆菌治疗失败的患者比例可能更高,且随着幽门螺杆菌治疗的普及,这一比例可能还会上升。推荐的二线疗法是由四环素、甲硝唑、铋盐和一种PPI组成的四联疗法。然而,由于该疗法存在副作用、每日服药片数多以及疗程长等问题,患者依从性差,限制了其疗效。此外,铋剂和甲硝唑并非在所有国家都有供应。另外,通常会采用一种持续时间更长(即10 - 14天)的PPI或RBC三联疗法联合两种抗生素。在经验性治疗策略中,二线治疗方案的选择取决于最初使用的治疗方法。如果一线使用的是以克拉霉素为基础的治疗方案,那么二线应建议使用四联疗法或PPI(或RBC)三联疗法联合甲硝唑和阿莫西林(或四环素)。如果二线治疗失败,应根据具体情况对患者进行评估。如有条件,建议采用药敏指导策略来选择最佳的三线治疗方案。培养可检测出对克拉霉素(最有效的)或其他抗菌药物(如阿莫西林、甲硝唑和四环素)敏感的幽门螺杆菌菌株。相反,在经验性治疗策略中,一种尚未使用过的三线治疗方案可能会有较高的成功率。可以使用PPI或RBC、阿莫西林和一种新的抗菌药物(如利福布汀、左氧氟沙星或呋喃唑酮)。多项研究表明,PPI、利福布汀和阿莫西林联合的三联疗法取得了相对较好的效果,不过有报道称存在可逆性骨髓毒性,如白细胞减少和血小板减少。PPI联合左氧氟沙星和阿莫西林的三联疗法也取得了初步的良好效果,且无明显不良反应。呋喃唑酮对根除幽门螺杆菌也显示出疗效,尽管不良反应可能会限制其使用,尤其是大剂量使用时。最后,对于多次幽门螺杆菌治疗失败的情况,可以使用非抗菌附加药物(如乳铁蛋白、益生菌等),目的是提高根除率或尽量减少副作用。