Suppr超能文献

左氧氟沙星对比克拉霉素在 10 天三联疗法一线治疗幽门螺杆菌根除中的疗效:一项单盲随机临床试验。

Levofloxacin versus clarithromycin in a 10 day triple therapy regimen for first-line Helicobacter pylori eradication: a single-blind randomized clinical trial.

机构信息

Department of Gastroenterology, Hospital of Laredo-Instituto de Formación e Investigación Marqués de Valdecilla (IFIMAV), Avda Derechos Humanos s/n, 39770 Laredo, Cantabria, Spain.

出版信息

J Antimicrob Chemother. 2012 Sep;67(9):2254-9. doi: 10.1093/jac/dks209. Epub 2012 Jun 11.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

There is growing evidence that the standard triple therapy against Helicobacter pylori infection is losing clinical effectiveness. A triple therapy regimen with levofloxacin, amoxicillin and a proton pump inhibitor has been reported to be effective and well tolerated, and this regimen has been suggested as an alternative first-line treatment. The aim of this single-blind randomized clinical trial was to compare the eradication success of two first-line triple therapy regimens in the north of Spain: clarithromycin, amoxicillin and omeprazole (CAO) versus levofloxacin, amoxicillin and omeprazole (LAO).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 250 consecutive patients diagnosed by conventional methods with H. pylori infection were randomized into one of two 10 day therapeutic regimens: standard CAO (n = 128) or LAO (n = 122). Eradication was confirmed by the (13)C-urea breath test. Adverse effects and compliance were also assessed. The clinical trial registration number was HPL08001HCLAD (EudraCT: 2008-001892-31).

RESULTS

Intention-to-treat cure rates were: CAO, 75.0% (96/128; 95% CI: 66.6%-82.2%) and LAO, 82.8% (101/122; 95% CI: 74.9%-89.0%). Per-protocol cure rates were: CAO, 78.0% (96/123; 95% CI: 69.7%-85.0%) and LAO, 83.1% (98/118; 95% CI: 75.0%-89.3%). There were no statistically significant differences in effectiveness between the two regimens. In addition, no relevant differences in compliance or adverse effects were demonstrated.

CONCLUSIONS

Levofloxacin-based treatment for H. pylori infection did not improve upon the eradication rate of the standard clarithromycin-based triple therapy in this study. This may reflect the progressive increase in in vitro resistance rates to levofloxacin observed in our region.

摘要

背景

越来越多的证据表明,标准的三联疗法治疗幽门螺杆菌感染的临床效果正在下降。含左氧氟沙星、阿莫西林和质子泵抑制剂的三联疗法已被证实有效且耐受良好,因此该方案被推荐作为一线替代治疗方案。本单盲随机临床试验的目的是比较两种在西班牙北部使用的一线三联疗法的根除成功率:克拉霉素、阿莫西林和奥美拉唑(CAO)与左氧氟沙星、阿莫西林和奥美拉唑(LAO)。

材料和方法

通过常规方法诊断为幽门螺杆菌感染的 250 例连续患者被随机分为两种 10 天治疗方案之一:标准 CAO(n=128)或 LAO(n=122)。通过(13)C-尿素呼气试验确认根除。还评估了不良反应和依从性。临床试验注册号为 HPL08001HCLAD(EudraCT:2008-001892-31)。

结果

意向治疗治愈率为:CAO,75.0%(96/128;95%CI:66.6%-82.2%)和 LAO,82.8%(101/122;95%CI:74.9%-89.0%)。方案治疗治愈率为:CAO,78.0%(96/123;95%CI:69.7%-85.0%)和 LAO,83.1%(98/118;95%CI:75.0%-89.3%)。两种方案的疗效无统计学差异。此外,在依从性或不良反应方面也没有显示出明显差异。

结论

在本研究中,含左氧氟沙星的治疗方案并未提高标准含克拉霉素三联疗法的根除率。这可能反映了我们地区观察到的左氧氟沙星体外耐药率的逐渐增加。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验