Ideal treatment for Helicobacter pylori: A systematic review

AbstractBackgroundThe success rates of therapies for treating Helicobacter pylori vary greatly worldwide and the ideal treatment has yet to be clearly established.AimsA systematic review was carried out to evaluate the effectiveness of current first and second-line therapies in treating H.pylori infection.MethodsTwo researchers independently carried out Internet search engine reviews (PUBMED, EMBASE, MEDLINE) of clinical trials on adults published between 1990 and 2012 in both English and Spanish.ResultsForty-three (n=8,123) clinical trials were evaluated that included first and second-line triple, quadruple, and sequential therapies. The eradication rates of the standard triple therapy are unacceptable (≤80%) in countries where H.pylori is highly resistant to clarithromycin and metronidazole. Administration of the standard triple therapy for more than 7days does not improve its effectiveness. No statistically significant differences were observed between the eradication rates of the quadruple therapy with bismuth and the standard triple therapy. Even though the sequential and concomitant therapies are equally successful regimens, the triple therapy with levofloxacin offers the best results as first and second-line treatment, but quinolone resistance can diminish its effectiveness. The triple therapy with levofloxacin and the sequential and concomitant treatments were superior to the standard triple regimen as first-line therapy.ConclusionsCurrently there is no ideal first or second-line treatment for achieving 100% eradication. The therapeutic order should be carried out according to the initial treatment and local antimicrobial resistance studies