4.2 Article

Effect of Helicobacter pylori eradication on the regression of gastric polyps in National Cancer Screening Program

期刊

KOREAN JOURNAL OF INTERNAL MEDICINE
卷 33, 期 3, 页码 506-511

出版社

KOREAN ASSOC INTERNAL MEDICINE
DOI: 10.3904/kjim.2016.286

关键词

Gastric hyperplastic polyps; National Cancer Screening Cohort; Helicobacter pylori eradication; Gastric polyp; Helicobacter

资金

  1. Korea Health Promotion Institute [1810600-1] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background/Aims: Western guidelines recommend Helicobacter pylori eradication in H. pylon-associated gastric polyps; however, there is no standard guideline in Korea. The aim of this study is to assess the effect of H. pylori eradication on the regression of gastric hyperplastic polyps in National Cancer Screening Cohort, representative of general population. Methods: Among participants in National Cancer Screening Program, subjects who had H. pylori positive gastric hyperplastic polyps less than 10 mm and underwent follow-up endoscopy and H. pylori testing were enrolled. The effect of H. pylori eradication on hyperplastic gastric polyps was estimated using odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Results: A total of 183 H. pylori infected subjects with hyperplastic polyp at baseline underwent follow-up endoscopy and H. pylori test after mean of 2.2 years. Successful H. pylori eradication markedly induced the disappearance of hyper plastic polyps comparing to non-eradication group (83.7% vs. 34.1%, p = 0.001). Successful eradication increased the possibility of disappearance of hyperplastic polyps (adjusted OR, 5.56; 95% CI, 2.63 to 11.11). Polyp size was inversely related with the disappearance of hyperplastic polyps (adjusted OR, 59; 95% CI, 0.48 to Conclusions: Eradication of H. pylori infection may induce disappearance of gastric hyperplastic polyps in National Cancer Screening Cohort.

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

4.2
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