Standard triple therapy for Helicobacter pylori infection in China: A meta-analysis

AIM: To assess the efficacy and safety of standard triple therapy compared with other pre-existing and new therapies in China. METHODS: Literature searches were conducted in the following databases: PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, the VIP database, the China National Knowledge Infrastructure database, and the Chinese Biomedical Database. A meta-analysis of all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing standard triple therapy for the eradication of Helico-bacter pylori with pre-existing and new therapies in China was performed using Comprehensive Meta-Analysis 2.0. There were 49 studies that met our criteria and the qualities of these studies were assessed using the Jadad scale. The Mantel-Haenszel method was used for pooling dichotomous data. We also conducted subgroup analyses according to age, duration of treatment and drug type. Sensitivity analyses and a cumulative meta-analysis were also performed with CMA 2.0. Publication bias was evaluated using Egger's test, Begg's test or a funnel plot. RESULTS: A total of 49 RCTs including 8332 patients were assessed. This meta-analysis showed that standard triple therapy with proton pump inhibitors (PPIs), amoxicillin (AMO) and clarithromycin (CLA) was inferior to sequential therapy [relative risk (RR) = 0.863; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.824-0.904], but was not superior to quadruple therapy (RR = 1.073; 95% CI: 0.849-1.357) or other triple therapies (RR = 1.01; 95% CI: 0.936-1.089). The meta-analysis also suggested that standard triple therapy is slightly more effective than dual therapy (RR = 1.14; 95% CI: 0.99-1.31). However, the differences were not statistically significant. We removed the only trial with a regimen lasting 14 d by sensitivity analysis and found that 7-d standard triple therapy was superior to 7-d dual therapy (RR = 1.222; 95% CI: 1.021-1.461). Moreover, a sub-analysis based on the duration of quadruple therapy indicated that the 7-d and 10-d standard triple therapies were inferior to sequential therapy (RR = 0.790; 95% CI: 0.718-0.868; RR = 0.917; 95% CI: 0.839-1.002, respectively). Additionally, there were no significant differences in cure rate or adverse events among standard triple therapy, quadruple therapy, and other triple therapies (RR = 0.940; 95% CI: 0.825-1.072; RR = 1.081; 95% CI: 0.848-1.378, respectively). Standard triple therapy had a higher occurrence of side effects than sequential therapy (RR = 1.283; 95% CI: 1.066-1.544). CONCLUSION: The eradication rates with a standard triple therapy consisting of PPI, AMO, and CLA are suboptimal in China, and new treatment agents need to be developed. (C) 2014 Baishideng Publishing Group Inc. All rights reserved.