4.6 Review

A new look at anti-Helicobacter pylori therapy

期刊

WORLD JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY
卷 17, 期 35, 页码 3971-3975

出版社

BAISHIDENG PUBLISHING GROUP INC
DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v17.i35.3971

关键词

Bismuth-containing quadruple therapy; Concomitant quadruple therapy; Hybrid (dual-concomitant) therapy; Rescue anti-Helicobacter pylori treatment; Sequential therapy

向作者/读者索取更多资源

With the rising prevalence of antimicrobial resistance, the treatment success of standard triple therapy has recently declined to unacceptable levels (i.e., 80% or less) in most countries. Therefore, several treatment regimens have emerged to cure Helicobacter pylori. (H. pylori.) infection. Novel first-line anti-H. pylori. therapies in 2011 include sequential therapy, concomitant quadruple therapy, hybrid (dual-concomitant) therapy and bismuth-containing quadruple therapy. After the failure of standard triple therapy, a bismuth-containing quadruple therapy comprising a proton pump inhibitor (PPI), bismuth, tetracycline and metronidazole can be employed as rescue treatment. Recently, triple therapy combining a PPI, levofloxacin and amoxicillin has been proposed as an alternative to the standard rescue therapy. This salvage regimen can achieve a higher eradication rate than bismuth-containing quadruple therapy in some regions and has less adverse effects. The best second-line therapy for patients who fail to eradicate H. pylori with first-line therapies containing clarithromycin, amoxicillin and metronidazole is unclear. However, a levofloxacin-based triple therapy is an accepted rescue treatment. Most guidelines suggest that patients requiring third-line therapy should be referred to a medical center and treated according to the antibiotic susceptibility test. Nonetheless, an empirical therapy (such as levofloxacin-based or furazolidone-based therapies) can be employed to terminate H. pylori. infection if antimicrobial sensitivity data are unavailable. (c) 2011 Baishideng. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据