Department of Gastroenterology, the First Affiliated Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310003, China.
J Zhejiang Univ Sci B. 2010 Sep;11(9):690-701. doi: 10.1631/jzus.B1000008.
The aim of our study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of the efficacy of short-term protocols for Helicobacter pylori eradication and to review the safety and adverse profiles of these eradication protocols.
Literatures were located through electronic searches by PubMed, Medline, ISI Web of Knowledge, and Cochrane Library using the relevant terms. Abstracts of important meetings were searched manually in some journal supplements. Additional bibliographies were identified from the reference lists of identified studies. Three independent reviewers systemically identified randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing short-duration protocols vs. 7-d proton pump inhibitor (PPI)-based triple protocols, as well as studies reporting eradication rates of short-duration protocols for H. pylori. Summary effect size was calculated as relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) using Review Manager 4.2, and P<0.05 was defined as statistically significant in all analyses.
Among 90 abstracts retrieved, 15 studies were analyzed, including a total of 30 treatment regimens with 1856 subjects. Mean intention-to-treat (ITT) cure rates of 63.2% and 81.3% were achieved with short-term protocols and 7-d PPI-containing protocols, respectively. Per-protocol (PP)-based overall cure rates were 66.6% and 86.1%, respectively. Short-term therapy was inferior to 7-d triple regimen (P<0.00001). After sub-analysis, however, comparing the effects of > or = 3-d protocols and 7-d triple protocols, the cumulative ITT RR was 0.95 (P=0.26), and PP RR was 0.95 (P=0.10), without significant heterogeneity. Moreover, slightly fewer adverse-effects were found in short-term protocols.
Although more economical, short-duration protocols are inferior to 7-d PPI-based triple protocols with regarding to eradication rate of H. pylori. Protocols of more than 3 d, however, may be equivalent to 7-d protocols.
本研究旨在对幽门螺杆菌短期根除方案的疗效进行系统评价和荟萃分析,并综述这些根除方案的安全性和不良事件谱。
通过电子检索 PubMed、Medline、ISI Web of Knowledge 和 Cochrane Library 数据库,使用相关术语查找文献。手工检索一些期刊增刊中的重要会议摘要。从已确定研究的参考文献列表中确定了其他参考文献。三位独立评审员系统地确定了比较短期方案与 7 天质子泵抑制剂(PPI)为基础的三联方案的随机对照试验(RCT),以及报告短期方案根除幽门螺杆菌的根除率的研究。使用 Review Manager 4.2 计算汇总效应量作为相对风险(RR)和 95%置信区间(CI),所有分析均定义 P<0.05 为统计学显著。
在检索到的 90 篇摘要中,有 15 项研究被分析,共包括 1856 例患者的 30 种治疗方案。短期方案和 7 天 PPI 三联方案的意向治疗(ITT)治愈率分别为 63.2%和 81.3%。基于方案的总体治愈率分别为 66.6%和 86.1%。短期治疗劣于 7 天三联疗法(P<0.00001)。然而,经过亚分析,比较>或=3 天方案和 7 天三联方案的效果时,累积 ITT RR 为 0.95(P=0.26),PP RR 为 0.95(P=0.10),无显著异质性。此外,短期方案中发现的不良反应略少。
尽管更经济,但短期方案在幽门螺杆菌根除率方面逊于 7 天 PPI 为基础的三联方案。然而,持续时间超过 3 天的方案可能与 7 天方案等效。