Evidence Hub

Clinical outcomes of eradication of Helicobacter pylori in nonulcer dyspepsia in a population with a high prevalence of infection: results of a 12-month randomized, double blind, placebo-controlled study

Mazzoleni LE, Sander GB, Ott EA, Barros SG, Francesconi CF, Polanczyk CA, Wortmann AC, Theil AL et al.

Digestive diseases and sciences, 2006

38 citations

Abstract

Ninety-one Helicobacter pylori-positive patients with nonulcer dyspepsia were randomized to receive either lansoprazole, amoxicillin, and clarithromycin or lansoprazole and placebo. A validated questionnaire assessed dyspeptic symptoms at baseline and at 3, 6, and 12 months. Endoscopies and biopsies were performed at baseline and at 3 and 12 months. There was an overall trend, although not statistically significant, for a benefit of H. pylori eradication. Of the patients in the antibiotics group, 16 of 46 (35%) had symptomatic improvement, versus 9 of 43 (21%) in the control group (P = 0.164). In a secondary analysis, it was found that of the patients without endoscopic gastric erosions, 15 of 34 (44%) in the antibiotics group and 5 of 33 (15%) of controls had symptomatic improvement (P = 0.015). Helicobacter pylori eradication did not prove to be clinically beneficial, although a tendency to symptomatic benefit was detected. Further studies are necessary to confirm the implications of endoscopic gastric erosions in these patients.

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free