Evidence Hub

Fourteen-day optimized levofloxacin-based therapy versus classical quadruple therapy for Helicobacter pylori treatment failures: a randomized clinical trial

Zhi-Jun Cao, Qi Chen, Wei Zhang, Xiao Liang, Jing-Xian Liao, Wen-Zhong Liu, S. Xiao, Hong Lu

Scandinavian Journal of Gastroenterology, 2015

284 participants · 45 citations

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To test the efficacy of lansoprazole, bismuth, levofloxacin, and amoxicillin therapy compared to bismuth metronidazole tetracycline (BMT) quadruple therapy for second-line treatment of Helicobacter pylori infection.

METHODS: A total of 284 patients who failed prior H. pylori eradication were randomized to receive 14-day regimens containing lansoprazole 30 mg twice a day (b.i.d.), bismuth subcitrate 240 mg b.i.d., and either amoxcillin, 1 g b.i.d. and levofloxacin 500 mg once daily (qd) (levofloxacin/bismuth therapy) or metronidazole 400 mg four times daily (q.i.d.) and tetracycline, 500 mg q.i.d. (BMT quadruple therapy). Endoscopy and culture were performed before treatment. Antimicrobial susceptibility was by agar dilution. H. pylori status was determined 6 weeks after the end of therapy using a (13)C-urea breath test.

RESULTS: The metronidazole, levofloxacin, tetracycline, and amoxicillin resistance rates were 85.3%, 40.2%, 1.1%, and 0.5%, respectively. The intention-to-treat and per-protocol (PP) eradication rates were 83% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 75.9-88.3%) and 88.1% (95% CI: 81.2-92.4%) (p = 0.22) for levofloxacin-bismuth (levo-bismuth) versus BMT quadruple, respectively, and PP rates were 85.4% (95% CI: 78.5-90.3%) and 90.6% (95% CI: 84.6-94.5%) (p = 0.18). Moderate and severe side effects were significantly higher with BMT quadruple than levo-bismuth (22.4% vs. 5%, p < 0.001) and higher in women (28.4%) than men (10.4%) in BMT quadruple therapy group…

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: 284 participants or records.

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