Systematic review with meta-analysis: the efficacy of levofloxacin triple therapy as the first- or second-line treatments of Helicobacter pylori infection

Chen PY, Wu MS, Chen CY, Bair MJ, Chou CK, Lin JT, Liou JM, Taiwan Gastrointestinal Disease and Helicobacter Consortium

Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics, 2016

4,574 participants · 75 citations

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Levofloxacin triple therapy has been used for the first-line and second-line treatment of Helicobacter pylori infection for more than 10 years. AIMS: To systematically review the efficacy of levofloxacin triple therapy in the first- and second-line treatment, and to assess the time trend and factors that might affect its efficacy. METHODS: Prospective trials reporting the efficacy of levofloxacin triple therapy in either the first-line or second-line treatment of H. pylori infection in adults were searched from the PubMed and Cochrane database from January 2000 to September 2015. Meta-analysis was performed to calculate the cumulative eradication rate and the efficacies in subgroups. RESULTS: Of the 322 articles identified, a total of 4574 patients from 41 trials, including 16 trials in the first-line treatment and 25 trials in the second-line treatment were eligible for analysis. The cumulative eradication rate was 77.3% (95% confidence intervals, CI: 74.7-79.6) and was 80.7% (95% CI 77.1-83.7) in the first-line treatment and 74.5% (95% CI: 70.9-77.8) in the second-line treatment. The efficacies of levofloxacin triple therapy before 2008, between 2009 and 2011, and after 2012 were 77.4%, 79.6% and 74.8% respectively. The eradication rate was higher when levofloxacin was given once daily (80.6%, 95% CI: 77.1-83.7) than twice daily (73.6%, 95% CI: 69.7-77.2). The efficacy was significantly higher in levofloxacin-susceptible strains than resistant strains (81.1%…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 4,574 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

• DOI
• PubMed
• Free full text
• Publisher page

Related studies

• Severe clinical outcomes of COVID-19 associated with proton pump inhibitors: a nationwide cohort study with propensity score matching Gut, 2020
• Thiophenes—Naturally Occurring Plant Metabolites: Biological Activities and In Silico Evaluation of Their Potential as Cathepsin D Inhibitors Plants, 2022
• Inhalable Mannosylated Rifampicin–Curcumin Co-Loaded Nanomicelles with Enhanced In Vitro Antimicrobial Efficacy for an Optimized Pulmonary Tuberculosis Therapy Pharmaceutics, 2022
• Association between cord blood 25-hydroxyvitamin D concentrations and respiratory tract infections in the first 6 months of age in a Korean population: a birth cohort study (COCOA) Korean Journal of Pediatrics, 2013
• GC-MS Analysis and Biomedical Therapy of Oil from n-Hexane Fraction of Scutellaria edelbergii Rech. f.: In Vitro, In Vivo, and In Silico Approach Molecules, 2021
• Novel Pharmacokinetic/Pharmacodynamic Parameters Quantify the Exposure–Effect Relationship of Levofloxacin against Fluoroquinolone-Resistant Escherichia coli Antibiotics, 2021

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