| Literature DB >> 26157713 |
Marjan Mokhtare1, Vahid Hosseini2, Hafez Tirgar Fakheri3, Iradj Maleki4, Tarang Taghvaei5, Seyed Mohammad Valizadeh6, Hossein Sardarian7, Shahram Agah8, Alireza Khalilian9.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The effectiveness of classic standard triple therapy regimen of helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) eradication has decreased to unacceptably low levels, largely related to development of resistance to metronidazole and clarithromycin. Thus successful eradication of H. pylori infections remains challenging. Therefore alternative treatments with superior effectiveness and safety should be designed and appropriately tested in all areas depending on the native resistance patterns. Furazolidone has been used successfully in eradication regimens previously and regimens containing furazolidone may be an ideal regimen.Entities:
Keywords: Bismuth; Furazolidone; Helicobacter pylori; Treatment effectiveness
Year: 2015 PMID: 26157713 PMCID: PMC4476222
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Med J Islam Repub Iran ISSN: 1016-1430
Frequency distribution of the endoscopic findings in the three groups
|
A(OABF) |
B(OABM-F) |
C(OAF) | p | ||
| Gender | Male | 64 (53) | 65 (54) | 67 (58) | 0.927 |
| Female | 60 (47) | 59 (46) | 57 (42) | ||
| Current Smoking | 14(11.3) | 15(12.1) | 22(17.1) | 0.274 | |
| History of GIB | 13(10.5) | 14(11.3) | 15(12.1) | 0.923 | |
| Endoscopic findings | DU | 73(58.9) | 76(61.3) | 77(62.1) | 0.926 |
| GU | 14(11.3) | 14(11.3) | 12(9.7) | 0.926 | |
| GU +DU | 3(2.4) | 3(2.4) | 2(1.6) | 0.926 | |
| DE | 7(5.6) | 9(7.3) | 5 (4) | 0.926 | |
| GE | 24(19.4) | 19(15.3) | 24(19.4) | 0.926 | |
| GE+DE | 3(2.4) | 3(2.4) | 4(3.2) | 0.926 | |
| Ulcer size >7 mm | 59(34.7) | 63(37.1) | 63(37.1) | 0.233 | |
| Deformity of bulb | 22(17.7) | 23(18.6) | 23(18.6) | 0.974 |
GIB= Gasterointestinal bleeding, DU= Duodenal Ulcer, GU= Gasreric Ulcer, DE= Duodenal Erosions, GE= Gasteric Erosions
The number and types of drug side effects in three treatment groups
| Side effects / treatment group |
A (OABF) |
B (OABM-F) |
C(OAF) | p |
|
Dyspepsia |
(4)3.2 |
(5)4.0 |
(5)4.0 |
.929 |
|
* Nausea |
(13)10.5 |
(8)6.5 |
(21)16.9 |
.031 |
|
Abdominal cramp |
(1)0.8 |
(0)0 |
(1)0.8 |
.607 |
|
Diarrhea |
(3)2.4 |
(1)0.8 |
(4)3.2 |
.411 |
|
Glossitis |
(2)1.6 |
(0)0 |
(0)0 |
.135 |
|
Bad taste |
(0)0 |
(0)0 |
(2)1.6 |
.135 |
|
Skin rash |
(2)1.6 |
(0)0 |
(1)0.8 |
.367 |
|
Drug Fever* |
(2)1.6 |
(0)0 |
(8)6.5 |
.005 |
| Bloating | (1)0.8 | (0)0 | (0)0 | .369 |
|
Dizziness |
(10)8.1 |
(6)4.8 |
(14)11.3 |
.176 |
|
Itching |
(0)0 |
(2)1.6 |
(0)0 |
.135 |
| Headache | (6)4.8 | (1)0.8 | (6)4.8 | .137 |
* p<0.05
Prevalence of mild, moderate and severe drug adverse effects of three treatment groups
|
Severity of side |
Group A (OABF) |
Group B (OABM-F) |
Group C (OAF) | p |
| Mild | 41 (33.1) | 30 (24.2) | 37 (29.8) | |
| Moderate side effects | 2 (1.6) | 2(1.6) | 18(14.5) | |
| Severe* | 5(4) | 4(3.2) | 6(4.8) | 0.812 |
*P value has been calculated for the incidence of severe side effects among three groups versus others
Compliance in three treatment regimens
|
Compliance rate/ |
Group A(OABF) |
Group B (OABM-F) |
Group C(OAF) | p |
| High (> 80% of drugs) | 120 (96.7) | 120(96.7) | 116(93.5) | 0.089 |
| Acceptable (60-80% of drugs ) | 3(2.4) | 2(1.6) | 5(4.0) | |
| Poor (< 60% of drugs) | 1(0.8) | 2(1.6) | 3(2.4) |
*P value has been calculated for the high compliance in three groups versus others
Intention-to-treat and per-protocol eradication rates in three treatment regimens
|
Total enrolled | Group A(OABF) (n=124) | Group B(OABM-F) (n=124) |
Group C(OAF) | p |
| Number of patients who have consumed >80% of drugs | 120 | 120 | 116 | |
| ITT* eradication rate with 95% CI (n=372) | 83.7% (104/124) (95%CI=77.3-90.4) | 79.8% (99/124) (95%CI=72.6-87.0) | 84.6%(105/124) (95%CI=78.2-91.1) | 0.557 |
| PP* eradication rate with 95% CI(n=356) | 86.6% (104/120)- (95%CI=80.5-92.8) | 82.5% (99/120) (95%CI=75.6-89.4) | 90.5%(105/116)-(95%CI=85.1-95.5) | 0.197 |
The cure rates was higher in treatment regimen C(OAF), but in general, the differences were not statistically significant (p=0.197, p=0.557, respectively for PP and ITT) and therefore, as far as helicobacter pylori eradication level is considered, the treatment regimen C(OAF) is in Grade B (good), and treatment regimen B(OABM-F) is in Grade D (poor) and treatment regimen A(OABF) is in Grade C (moderate or acceptable).
Fig. 1