Efficacy and safety of high-dose esomeprazole–amoxicillin dual therapy for Helicobacter pylori rescue treatment: a multicenter, prospective, randomized, controlled trial
Abstract
Abstract Background: High-dose dual therapy (HDDT) with proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) and amoxicillin has attracted widespread attention due to its favorable efficacy in eradicating Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori). This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of high-dose PPI–amoxicillin dual therapy and bismuth-containing quadruple therapy for H. pylori rescue treatment. Methods: This was a prospective, randomized, multicenter, non-inferiority trial. Patients recruited from eight centers who had failed previous treatment were randomly (1:1) allocated to two eradication groups: HDDT (esomeprazole 40 mg and amoxicillin 1000 mg three times daily; the HDDT group) and bismuth-containing quadruple therapy (esomeprazole 40 mg, bismuth potassium citrate 220 mg, and furazolidone 100 mg twice daily, combined with tetracycline 500 mg three times daily; the tetracycline, furazolidone, esomeprazole, and bismuth [TFEB] group) for 14 days. The primary endpoint was the H. pylori eradication rate. The secondary endpoints were adverse effects, symptom improvement rates, and patient compliance. Results: A total of 658 patients who met the criteria were enrolled in this study. The HDDT group achieved eradication rates of 75.4% (248/329), 81.0% (248/306), and 81.3% (248/305) asdetermined by the intention-to-treat (ITT), modified intention-to-treat (MITT), and per-protocol (PP) analyses, respectively. The eradication rates were similar to those in the TFEB group: 78.1% (257/329), 84.2%…
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. Reported size: 658 participants or records.
Read the paper
Related studies
- Safety and efficacy of COVID‐19 vaccines: A systematic review and meta‐analysis of controlled and randomized clinical trials
- Accuracy Comparison between Robot-Assisted Dental Implant Placement and Static/Dynamic Computer-Assisted Implant Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of In Vitro Studies
- Determinants of passive antibody efficacy in SARS-CoV-2 infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis
- Cleaning efficacy of EDDY versus ultrasonically-activated irrigation in root canals: a systematic review and meta-analysis
- Bonding Efficacy of Universal Resin Adhesives to Zirconia Substrates: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
- In vitro antimicrobial activity of extracts and essential oils of Cinnamomum, Salvia, and Mentha spp. against foodborne pathogens: A meta-analysis study
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.