Search

Background/Aims: This study aimed at comparing the efficacy and tolerability of 5 different regimens for Helicobacter pylori eradication in recent years. Methods:H. pylori-positive patients with dyspeptic symptoms were included and separated into 5 groups. The 'PAC group' was given pantoprazole, amoxicillin and clarithromycin for 14 days. The 'PAM group' was given pantoprazole, amoxicillin and metronidazole for 14 days. The 'bismuth-containing group' was given pantoprazole, bismuth subsalicylate, tetracycline and metronidazole for 14 days. The 'sequential group' was given pantoprazole and amoxicillin for 5 days, followed by pantoprazole, tetracycline, and metronidazole for the next 5 days. The 'concomitant group' was given pantoprazole, amoxicillin, tetracycline, and metronidazole for 10 days. Eradication was assessed through the urea breath test on 6 weeks after eradication therapy. Results: The eradication rate of intention-to-treat/per protocol were 42/48.3% in the PAC group, 52/54.2% in the PAM group, 62/77.5% in the bismuth group, 71/80.7% in the sequential group and 72/83.7% in concomitant group. The frequency of mild and moderate side effects was similar between groups. Conclusion: The concomitant and sequential therapies are an effective treatment for H. pylori. Bismuth-containing therapy is superior to conventional triple therapies; however, the eradication rate is not satisfactory. In our country, conventional triple therapies are not effective for eradication. © 2015 S. Karger AG, Basel [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: To analyze the risk factors of lamivudine treatment failure (LTF) for the long-term use in patients with low viral load (LVL). Material and Methods: In this multicenter study, 548 antiviral naïve noncirrhotic adult patients with LVL (for HBeAg+ patients HBV DNA <109 copies/ml and for HBeAg- patients HBV DNA <107 copies/ml) were enrolled. As a control group, 46 lamivudine-initiated patients with high viral load (HVL) were included. Primary outcome was switching to or adding on another antiviral drug as a consequence of primary nonresponse, partial response, viral breakthrough or adverse events. Secondary outcomes included LTF rates at 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 years and LTF-related viral and host factors. Results: Among 594 patients, 294 had to change lamivudine at the follow-up. Primary nonresponse, partial response, viral breakthrough or adverse events frequencies were 6.8, 1.6, 64.5 and 0.1%, respectively. Five-year LTF rates were 61.3 and 84.2% in patients with LVL and HVL, respectively. Among patients with LVL, patients with <100,000 copies/ml and ≥100,000 copies/ml had 54.8 and 67.3% LTF rates at the end of the 5th year, respectively. Logistic regression analysis of risk factors showed HBeAg+, hepatic activity index, HBV DNA, virological response at 6 months and duration of follow-up were independent predictors for LTF (p values were 0.001, 0.008, 0.003, 0.020 and 0.003, respectively). Conclusion: Similar to patients with HVL, first-line lamivudine therapy is not efficient for long-term use in patients with LVL. LTF risk is so high even in the absence of worse predictive factors. © 2013 S. Karger AG, Basel [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]