Xin Yiqiao, Manson Jan, Govan Lindsay, Harbour Robin, Bennison Jenny, Watson Eleanor, Wu Olivia
Health Economics and Health Technology Assessment (HEHTA), Institute of Health and Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
Knowledge and Information, Healthcare Improvement Scotland, Glasgow, UK.
BMC Gastroenterol. 2016 Jul 26;16(1):80. doi: 10.1186/s12876-016-0491-7.
Approximately half of the world's population is infected with Helicobacter pylori (H.pylori), a bacterium shown to be linked with a series of gastrointestinal diseases. A growing number of systematic reviews (SRs) have been published comparing the effectiveness of different treatments for H.pylori infection but have not reached a consistent conclusion. The objective of this study is to provide an overview of SRs of pharmacological therapies for the eradication of H.pylori.
Major electronic databases were searched to identify relevant SRs published between 2002 and February 2016. Studies were considered eligible if they included RCTs comparing different pharmacological regimens for treating patients diagnosed as H.pylori infected and pooled the eradication rates in a meta-analysis. A modified version of the 'A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews' (AMSTAR) was used to assess the methodological quality. A Bayesian random effects network meta-analysis (NMA) was conducted to compare the different proton pump inhibitors (PPI) within triple therapy.
30 SRs with pairwise meta-analysis were included. In triple therapy, the NMA ranked the esomeprazole to be the most effective PPI, followed by rabeprazole, while no difference was observed among the three old generations of PPI for the eradication of H.pylori. When comparing triple and bismuth-based therapy, the relative effectiveness appeared to be dependent on the choice of antibiotics within the triple therapy; moxifloxacin or levofloxacin-based triple therapy were both associated with greater effectiveness than bismuth-based therapy as a second-line treatment, while bismuth-based therapy achieved similar or greater eradication rate compared to clarithromycin-based therapy. Inconsistent findings were reported regarding the use of levofloxacin/moxifloxacin in the first-line treatment; this could be due to the varied resistant rate to different antibiotics across regions and populations. Critical appraisal showed a low-moderate level of overall methodological quality of included studies.
Our analysis suggests that the new generation of PPIs and use of moxifloxacin or levofloxacin within triple therapy as second-line treatment were associated with greater effectiveness. Given the varied antibiotic resistant rate across regions, the appropriateness of pooling results together in meta-analysis should be carefully considered and the recommendation of the choice of antibiotics should be localized.
全球约一半人口感染幽门螺杆菌(H.pylori),该细菌与一系列胃肠道疾病相关。越来越多的系统评价(SRs)发表,比较了不同治疗方法对幽门螺杆菌感染的疗效,但尚未得出一致结论。本研究的目的是概述根除幽门螺杆菌的药物治疗的系统评价。
检索主要电子数据库,以识别2002年至2016年2月发表的相关系统评价。如果研究包括比较不同药物治疗方案治疗确诊为幽门螺杆菌感染患者的随机对照试验(RCTs),并在荟萃分析中汇总根除率,则认为这些研究符合条件。使用“系统评价评估测量工具”(AMSTAR)的修改版来评估方法学质量。进行贝叶斯随机效应网络荟萃分析(NMA),以比较三联疗法中不同质子泵抑制剂(PPI)。
纳入了30项进行成对荟萃分析的系统评价。在三联疗法中,NMA将埃索美拉唑列为最有效的PPI,其次是雷贝拉唑,而三代老PPI在根除幽门螺杆菌方面未观察到差异。比较三联疗法和铋剂疗法时,相对疗效似乎取决于三联疗法中抗生素的选择;以莫西沙星或左氧氟沙星为基础的三联疗法作为二线治疗均比铋剂疗法更有效,而铋剂疗法与以克拉霉素为基础的疗法相比,根除率相似或更高。关于左氧氟沙星/莫西沙星在一线治疗中的使用,报告结果不一致;这可能是由于不同地区和人群对不同抗生素的耐药率不同。关键评价显示纳入研究的总体方法学质量为低至中等水平。
我们的分析表明,新一代PPI以及三联疗法中使用莫西沙星或左氧氟沙星作为二线治疗与更高的疗效相关。鉴于不同地区抗生素耐药率不同,应仔细考虑在荟萃分析中汇总结果的合理性,抗生素选择的建议应本地化。