4.8 Article

Prospective multicentre study on antibiotic resistance of Helicobacter pylori strains obtained from children living in Europe

期刊

GUT
卷 55, 期 12, 页码 1711-1716

出版社

BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1136/gut.2006.091272

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Aim: To prospectively assess the antibacterial resistance rate in Helicobacter pylori strains obtained from symptomatic children in Europe. Methods: During a 4-year period, 17 paediatric centres from 14 European countries reported prospectively on patients infected with H pylori, for whom antibiotic susceptibility was tested. Results: A total of 1233 patients were reported from Northern (3%), Western (70%), Eastern (9%) and Southern Europe (18%); 41% originated from outside Europe as indicated by mother's birth-country; 13% were,6 years of age, 43% 6 - 11 years of age and 44% > 11 years of age. Testing was carried out before the first treatment (group A, n = 1037), and after treatment failure (group B, n = 196). Overall resistance to clarithromycin was detected in 24% (mean, A: 20%, B: 42%). The primary clarithromycin resistance rate was higher in boys (odds ratio (OR) 1.58; 1.12 to 2.24, p = 0.01), in children,6 years compared with > 12 years (OR 1.82, 1.10 to 3.03, p = 0.020) and in patients living in Southern Europe compared with those living in Northern Europe (OR 2.25; 1.52 to 3.30, p < 0.001). Overall resistance rate to metronidazole was 25% (A: 23%, B: 35%) and higher in children born outside Europe (A: adjusted. OR 2.42, 95% CI: 1.61 to 3.66, p < 0.001). Resistance to both antibiotics occurred in 6.9% (A: 5.3%, B: 15.3%). Resistance to amoxicillin was exceptional (0.6%). Children with peptic ulcer disease (80/1180, 6.8%) were older than patients without ulcer (p = 0.001). Conclusion: The primary resistance rate of H pylori strains obtained from unselected children in Europe is high. The use of antibiotics for other indications seems to be the major risk factor for development of primary resistance.

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

4.8
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