The TETRA study: a prospective evaluation of Helicobacter pylori 'test-and-treat' strategy on 736 patients in clinical practice

Helicobacter pylori "Test-and-Treat" strategy with urea breath test: A cost-effective strategy for the management of dyspepsia and the prevention of ulcer and gastric cancer in Spain-Results of the Hp-Breath initiative

BACKGROUND

Data from clinical trials comparing Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) management strategies in patients with dyspepsia are limited. Cost-effectiveness simulation models might help to identify the optimal strategy.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the cost-effectiveness of the H. pylori "Test and Treat" (T&T) strategy including the use of urea breath test (UBT) vs symptomatic treatment (ST) and vs upper gastrointestinal endoscopy (UGE) as a first procedure in patients with dyspepsia.

METHODS

Three main strategies: "T&T" strategy including the use of UBT, "UGE" and "ST" have been compared using cost-effectiveness models developed in accordance with the Spanish medical practice. For the model simulations, a time horizon of 4 weeks was considered for the endpoint "Dyspepsia symptoms relief" and 10 years when using "Peptic ulcer avoided" and "Gastric cancer avoided" endpoints.

RESULTS

For the endpoint "Dyspepsia symptoms relief", T&T strategy appears to be the most cost-effective (883€/success) compared to UGE strategy and to ST strategy (respectively 1628€ and 990€/success). For the endpoint "Probability of peptic ulcer", the T&T strategy appears to be the most cost-effective (421€/peptic ulcer avoided/y) compared to UGE strategy and ST strategy (respectively 728€ and 632€/peptic ulcer avoided/y). For the endpoint "Gastric cancer avoided", the T&T strategy appears to be the most cost-effective (524€/gastric cancer avoided/y) compared to UGE strategy and "ST" strategy (respectively 716€ and 696€/gastric cancer avoided/y).

CONCLUSIONS

T&T strategy including the use of UBT is the most cost-effective medical approach for management of dyspepsia and for the prevention of ulcer and gastric cancer.

Prospective, study comparing the accuracy of two different stool antigen tests (Premier Platinum HpSA and novel ImmunoCard STAT! rapid test) for the diagnosis of Helicobacter pylori infection

BACKGROUND

At present only monoclonal EIA (enzyme-immunoassay) stool antigen-tests have obtained optimal accuracy in the diagnosis of Helicobacter pylori. Our aim was to evaluate the accuracy of two stool antigen-tests, the validated Premier Platinum HpSA PLUS (EIA test) and the newly available ImmunoCard STAT! HpSA HD (rapid test) for the initial diagnosis and the confirmation of eradication of H. pylori infection.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with indication of H. pylori diagnosis, or confirmation after treatment were included. Data were coded to protect personal data and ensure blindness between tests. Accuracy was considered as coincident diagnosis with the gold standard (13C-urea breath test, UBT). The EIA was used as a bench standard. All stool tests were performed in duplicate.

RESULTS

264 patients completed the protocol (100 naïve, 164 post-eradication). Average age was 52 years, 61% women, 11% ulcer. Positive diagnoses by UBT were 41% for naïve and 17% for post-eradication. Overall ImmunoCard and EIA accuracies were respectively 91% (95%C.I.=88-94%) and 89% (86-93%), sensitivities 72% (67-78%) and 72% (67-78%), and specificities 98% (96-100%), and 95% (92-97%). Concordance between ImmunoCard and EIA was 95% (93-98%).

DISCUSSION

Our results indicate that the newly available ImmunoCard rapid stool antigen-test achieves 90% accuracy, with high specificity but suboptimal sensitivity. The ImmunoCard attained equivalent accuracies as the EIA bench standard, with 95% concordance.

High efficacy of gemifloxacin-containing therapy in Helicobacter Pylori eradication: A pilot empirical second-line rescue therapy

BACKGROUND

Helicobacter pylori (H pylori) is a common gastric pathogen which is associated with chronic gastritis, peptic ulcer, and gastric cancer. It has worldwide distribution with higher incidence in developing countries. Gemifloxacin is a fluoroquinolone antibiotic with documented in vitro activity against H pylori. Considering that there is no clinical data to verify gemifloxacin efficacy in H pylori eradication, this pilot clinical trial was designed.

METHODS

This prospective pilot study was performed during February 2014 to February 2015. A regimen of gemifloxacin (320 mg single dose) plus twice daily doses of amoxicillin1g, bismuth 240 mg, and omeprazole 20 mg for 14 days were prescribed for H pylori infected patients in whom a first-line standard quadruple therapy (clarithromycin-amoxicillin-bismuth-omeprazole) had failed. To confirm H pylori eradication a 13C-urea breath test was performed 4 weeks after treatment.Compliance and incidence of adverse effects were evaluated by questionnaires.

RESULTS

A total of 120 patients were enrolled consecutively; out of which 106 patients achieved H pylori eradication; per-protocol and intention-to-treat eradication rates were 91.4% (95% CI: 85.5-97.6) and 88.3% (95% CI: 75.4-92.4) respectively. Three patients (2.5%) failed to take at least 80% of the drugs and excluded from the final analysis. Adverse effects were reported in 42% of patients, most commonly including nausea (15%) and diarrhea (13.3%), which was intense in 1 patient and led to the discontinuation of treatment. In total, 96.7% (116/120) of the patients took the medications correctly.

CONCLUSION

This study revealed that gemifloxacin-containing quadruple therapy provides high H pylori eradication rate (≥90% PP cure rate), and this agent can be included in the list of second-line H pylori therapeutic regimens.

Helicobacter pylori second-line rescue therapy with levofloxacin- and bismuth-containing quadruple therapy, after failure of standard triple or non-bismuth quadruple treatments

BACKGROUND

The most commonly used second-line Helicobacter pylori eradication regimens are bismuth-containing quadruple therapy and levofloxacin-containing triple therapy, both offering suboptimal results. Combining bismuth and levofloxacin may enhance the efficacy of rescue eradication regimens.

AIMS

To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of a second-line quadruple regimen containing levofloxacin and bismuth in patients whose previous H. pylori eradication treatment failed.

METHODS

This was a prospective multicenter study including patients in whom a standard triple therapy (PPI-clarithromycin-amoxicillin) or a non-bismuth quadruple therapy (PPI-clarithromycin-amoxicillin-metronidazole, either sequential or concomitant) had failed. Esomeprazole (40 mg b.d.), amoxicillin (1 g b.d.), levofloxacin (500 mg o.d.) and bismuth (240 mg b.d.) was prescribed for 14 days. Eradication was confirmed by (13) C-urea breath test. Compliance was determined through questioning and recovery of empty medication envelopes. Incidence of adverse effects was evaluated by questionnaires.

RESULTS

200 patients were included consecutively (mean age 47 years, 67% women, 13% ulcer). Previous failed therapy included: standard clarithromycin triple therapy (131 patients), sequential (32) and concomitant (37). A total of 96% took all medications correctly. Per-protocol and intention-to-treat eradication rates were 91.1% (95%CI = 87-95%) and 90% (95%CI = 86-94%). Cure rates were similar regardless of previous (failed) treatment or country of origin. Adverse effects were reported in 46% of patients, most commonly nausea (17%) and diarrhoea (16%); 3% were intense but none was serious.

CONCLUSIONS

Fourteen-day bismuth- and levofloxacin-containing quadruple therapy is an effective (≥90% cure rate), simple and safe second-line strategy in patients whose previous standard triple or non-bismuth quadruple (sequential or concomitant) therapies have failed.

Helicobacter pylori first-line and rescue treatments in the presence of penicillin allergy

BACKGROUND

Helicobacter pylori eradication is a challenge in penicillin allergy.

AIM

To assess the efficacy and safety of first-line and rescue treatments in patients allergic to penicillin.

METHODS

Prospective multicenter study. Patients allergic to penicillin were given a first-line treatment comprising (a) 7-day omeprazole-clarithromycin-metronidazole and (b) 10-day omeprazole-bismuth-tetracycline-metronidazole. Rescue treatments were as follows: (a) bismuth quadruple therapy; (b) 10-day PPI-clarithromycin-levofloxacin; and (c) 10-day PPI-clarithromycin-rifabutin. Eradication was confirmed by (13)C-urea breath test. Compliance was determined through questioning and recovery of empty medication envelopes. Adverse effects were evaluated by questionnaires.

RESULTS

In total, 267 consecutive treatments were included. (1) First-line treatment: Per-protocol and intention-to-treat eradication rates with omeprazole-clarithromycin-metronidazole were 59 % (62/105; 95 % CI 49-62 %) and 57 % (64/112; 95 % CI 47-67 %). Respective figures for PPI-bismuth-tetracycline-metronidazole were 75 % (37/49; 95 % CI 62-89 %) and 74 % (37/50; 95 % CI (61-87 %) (p < 0.05). Compliance with treatment was 94 and 98 %, respectively. Adverse events were reported in 14 % with both regimens (all mild). (2) Second-line treatment: Intention-to-treat eradication rate with omeprazole-clarithromycin-levofloxacin was 64 % both after triple and quadruple failure; compliance was 88-100 %, with 23-29 % adverse effects (all mild). (3) Third-/fourth-line treatment: Intention-to-treat eradication rate with PPI-clarithromycin-rifabutin was 22 %.

CONCLUSION

In allergic to penicillin patients, a first-line treatment with a bismuth-containing quadruple therapy (PPI-bismuth-tetracycline-metronidazole) seems to be a better option than the triple PPI-clarithromycin-metronidazole regimen. A levofloxacin-based regimen (together with a PPI and clarithromycin) represents a second-line rescue option in the presence of penicillin allergy.

Two-week, high-dose proton pump inhibitor, moxifloxacin triple Helicobacter pylori therapy after failure of standard triple or non-bismuth quadruple treatments

BACKGROUND

Aim was to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of a moxifloxacin-containing second-line triple regimen in patients whose previous Helicobacter pylori eradication treatment failed.

METHODS

Prospective multicentre study including patients in whom a triple therapy or a non-bismuth-quadruple-therapy failed. Moxifloxacin (400mg qd), amoxicillin (1g bid), and esomeprazole (40 mg bid) were prescribed for 14 days. Eradication was confirmed by (13)C-urea-breath-test. Compliance was determined through questioning and recovery of empty medication envelopes.

RESULTS

250 patients were consecutively included (mean age 48 ± 15 years, 11% with ulcer). Previous (failed) therapy included: standard triple (n = 179), sequential (n = 27), and concomitant (n = 44); 97% of patients took all medications, 4 were lost to follow-up. Intention-to-treat and per-protocol eradication rates were 82.4% (95% CI, 77-87%) and 85.7% (95% CI, 81-90%). Cure rates were similar independently of diagnosis (ulcer, 77%; dyspepsia, 82%) and previous treatment (standard triple, 83%; sequential, 89%; concomitant, 77%). At multivariate analysis, only age was associated with eradication (OR = 0.957; 95% CI, 0.933-0.981). Adverse events were reported in 25.2% of patients: diarrhoea (9.6%), abdominal pain (9.6%), and nausea (9.2%).

CONCLUSION

14-day moxifloxacin-containing triple therapy is an effective and safe second-line strategy in patients whose previous standard triple therapy or non-bismuth quadruple (sequential or concomitant) therapy has failed, providing a simple alternative to bismuth quadruple regimen.

Functional dyspepsia in children

Functional dyspepsia (FD) is a widely prevalent problem in pediatrics, reportedly occurring in 3% to 27% of children and accounting for considerable impact on quality of life and health care costs. FD is defined by the Rome III classification as persistent upper abdominal pain or discomfort, not related to bowel movements, and without an organic cause, that is present for at least 2 months prior to diagnosis. Abnormal sensory perception, motor dysfunction, and psychosocial factors have been implicated in the causation of FD. Hypersensitivity to gastric distension, delayed gastric emptying, antral hypomotility, and gastric dysrhythmia are some abnormalities that have been noted in FD. Diagnosis of FD is based on a thorough history and examination, and an appropriate selection of tests based on clinical judgment, the presence of alarm signs, and response to treatment. A positive diagnosis of FD helps to shift focus from further testing to treatment of symptoms. The majority of children with dyspepsia do not have mucosal lesions on endoscopy; hence, endoscopy is not mandatory for the diagnosis of FD. Helicobacter pylori is an uncommon cause of dyspepsia in children, and test and treat strategy is discouraged. Delayed gastric emptying may be present in up to 70% of children with dyspepsia. A biopsychosocial approach to treatment involving medications, psychological and social supports, and complementary therapies is advocated. Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) and prokinetics are commonly used first-line medications. PPIs are preferred when epigastric pain is the predominant symptom, whereas prokinetics may be chosen when postprandial fullness or early satiety is the main symptom. PPIs may be more efficacious and cost-effective than H2 blockers according to adult data.

Third-line rescue therapy with bismuth-containing quadruple regimen after failure of two treatments (with clarithromycin and levofloxacin) for H. pylori infection

BACKGROUND

Helicobacter pylori eradication therapy with a proton pump inhibitor (PPI), clarithromycin, and amoxicillin fails in >20 % of cases. A rescue therapy with PPI-amoxicillin-levofloxacin still fails in >20 % of patients.

AIM

To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of a bismuth-containing quadruple regimen in patients with two consecutive eradication failures.

METHODS

Prospective multicenter study of patients in whom 1st treatment with PPI-clarithromycin-amoxicillin and 2nd with PPI-amoxicillin-levofloxacin had failed. A 3rd eradication regimen with a 7- to 14-day PPI (standard dose b.i.d.), bismuth subcitrate (120 mg q.i.d. or 240 mg b.i.d.), tetracycline (from 250 mg t.i.d. to 500 mg q.i.d.) and metronidazole (from 250 mg t.i.d. to 500 mg q.i.d.). Eradication was confirmed by (13)C-urea-breath-test 4-8 weeks after therapy. Compliance was determined through questioning and recovery of empty medication envelopes. Adverse effects were evaluated by means of a questionnaire.

RESULTS

Two hundred patients (mean age 50 years, 55 % females, 20 % peptic ulcer/80 % uninvestigated-functional dyspepsia) were initially included, and two were lost to follow-up. In all, 97 % of patients complied with the protocol. Per-protocol and intention-to-treat eradication rates were 67 % (95 % CI 60-74 %) and 65 % (58-72 %). Adverse effects were reported in 22 % of patients, the most common being nausea (12 %), abdominal pain (11 %), metallic taste (8.5 %), and diarrhea (8 %), none of them severe.

CONCLUSION

A bismuth-containing quadruple regimen is an acceptable third-line strategy and a safe alternative after two previous H. pylori eradication failures with standard clarithromycin- and levofloxacin-containing triple therapies.

Second-line rescue triple therapy with levofloxacin after failure of non-bismuth quadruple "sequential" or "concomitant" treatment to eradicate H. pylori infection

BACKGROUND

Non-bismuth quadruple "sequential" and "concomitant" regimens, including a proton pump inhibitor (PPI), amoxicillin, clarithromycin and a nitroimidazole, are increasingly used as first-line treatments for Helicobacter pylori infection. Eradication with rescue regimens may be challenging after failure of key antibiotics such as clarithromycin and nitroimidazoles.

AIM

To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of a second-line levofloxacin-containing triple regimen (PPI-amoxicillin-levofloxacin) in the eradication of H. pylori after non-bismuth quadruple-containing treatment failure.

DESIGN

prospective multicenter study.

PATIENTS

in whom a non-bismuth quadruple regimen, administered either sequentially (PPI + amoxicillin for 5 days followed by PPI + clarithromycin + metronidazole for 5 more days) or concomitantly (PPI + amoxicillin + clarithromycin + metronidazole for 10 days) had previously failed.

INTERVENTION

levofloxacin (500 mg b.i.d.), amoxicillin (1 g b.i.d.) and PPI (standard dose b.i.d.) for 10 days.

OUTCOME

eradication was confirmed with (13)C-urea breath test 4-8 weeks after therapy. Compliance and tolerance: compliance was determined through questioning and recovery of empty medication envelopes. Incidence of adverse effects was evaluated by means of a questionnaire.

RESULTS

100 consecutive patients were included (mean age 50 years, 62% females, 12% peptic ulcer and 88% dyspepsia): 37 after "sequential", and 63 after "concomitant" treatment failure. All patients took all medications correctly. Overall, per-protocol and intention-to-treat H. pylori eradication rates were 75.5% (95% CI 66-85%) and 74% (65-83%). Respective intention-to-treat cure rates for "sequential" and "concomitant" failure regimens were 74.4% and 71.4%, respectively. Adverse effects were reported in six (6%) patients; all of them were mild.

CONCLUSION

Ten-day levofloxacin-containing triple therapy constitutes an encouraging second-line strategy in patients with previous non-bismuth quadruple "sequential" or "concomitant" treatment failure.

Helicobacter Pylori "Test-and-Treat" Strategy for Management of Dyspepsia: A Comprehensive Review

OBJECTIVES:

Deciding on whether the Helicobacter pylori test-and-treat strategy is an appropriate diagnostic–therapeutic approach for patients with dyspepsia invites a series of questions. The aim present article addresses the test-and-treat strategy and attempts to provide practical conclusions for the clinician who diagnoses and treats patients with dyspepsia.

METHODS:

Bibliographical searches were performed in MEDLINE using the keywords Helicobacter pylori, test-and-treat, and dyspepsia. We focused mainly on data from randomized controlled trials (RCTs), systematic reviews, meta-analyses, cost-effectiveness analyses, and decision analyses.

RESULTS:

Several prospective studies and decision analyses support the use of the test-and-treat strategy, although we must be cautious when extrapolating the results from one geographical area to another. Many factors determine whether this strategy is appropriate in each particular area. The test-and-treat strategy will cure most cases of underlying peptic ulcer disease, prevent most potential cases of gastroduodenal disease, and yield symptomatic benefit in a minority of patients with functional dyspepsia. Future studies should be able to stratify dyspeptic patients according to their likelihood of improving after treatment of infection by H. pylori.

CONCLUSIONS:

The test-and-treat strategy will cure most cases of underlying peptic ulcer disease and prevent most potential cases of gastroduodenal disease. In addition, a minority of infected patients with functional dyspepsia will gain symptomatic benefit. Several prospective studies and decision analyses support the use of the test-and-treat strategy. The test-and-treat strategy is being reinforced by the accumulating data that support the increasingly accepted idea that “the only good H. pylori is a dead H. pylori”.

Second-line therapy with levofloxacin after failure of treatment to eradicate helicobacter pylori infection: time trends in a Spanish Multicenter Study of 1000 patients

BACKGROUND

Second-line bismuth-containing quadruple therapy is complex and frequently induces adverse effects. A triple rescue regimen containing levofloxacin is a potential alternative; however, resistance to quinolones is rapidly increasing.

AIM

To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of a second-line triple-regimen-containing levofloxacin in patients whose Helicobacter pylori eradication treatment failed and to assess whether the efficacy of the regimen decreases with time.

DESIGN

Prospective multicenter study.

PATIENTS

In whom treatment with a regimen comprising a proton-pump inhibitor, clarithromycin, and amoxicillin had failed.

INTERVENTION

Levofloxacin (500 mg bid), amoxicillin (1 g bid), and omeprazole (20 mg bid) for 10 days.

OUTCOME

Eradication was confirmed using the C-urea breath test 4 to 8 weeks after therapy. Compliance/tolerance: Compliance was determined through questioning and recovery of empty medication envelopes. Incidence of adverse effects was evaluated by means of a questionnaire.

RESULTS

The study sample comprised 1000 consecutive patients (mean age, 49 ± 15 y, 42% men, 33% peptic ulcer) of whom 97% took all medications correctly. Per-protocol and intention-to-treat eradication rates were 75.1% (95% confidence interval, 72%-78%) and 73.8% (95% confidence interval, 71%-77%). Efficacy (intention-to-treat) was 76% in the year 2006, 68% in 2007, 70% in 2008, 76% in 2009, 74% in 2010, and 81% in 2011. In the multivariate analysis, none of the studied variables (including diagnosis and year of treatment) were associated with success of eradication. Adverse effects were reported in 20% of patients, most commonly nausea (7.9%), metallic taste (3.9%), myalgia (3.1%), and abdominal pain (2.9%).

CONCLUSIONS

Ten-day levofloxacin-containing therapy is an encouraging second-line strategy, providing a safe and simple alternative to quadruple therapy in patients whose previous standard triple therapy has failed. The efficacy of this regimen remains stable with time.

[Clinical practice guideline on the management of patients with dyspepsia. Update 2012]

The aim of the Clinical Practice Guideline (CPG) on the Management of Patients with Dyspepsia is to generate recommendations on the optimal approach to dyspepsia in the primary care and specialized outpatient setting. The main objective of this CPG is to help to optimize the diagnostic process, identifying patients with a low risk of a serious organic disease (mainly tumoral), who could be safely managed without the need for invasive diagnostic tests and/or referral to a specialist. The importance of this aim lies in the need to accurately diagnose patients with esophagogastric cancer and correctly treat peptic ulcer while, at the same time, reduce negative endoscopies in order to appropriately use the available healthcare resources. This CPG reviews the initial strategies that can be used in patients with uninvestigated dyspepsia and evaluates the possible decision to begin empirical therapy or to investigate the existence of a lesion that could explain the symptoms. This CPG also discusses functional dyspepsia, which encompasses all patients with dyspepsia with no demonstrable cause on endoscopy. Recommendations for the diagnosis and treatment of peptic ulcer and Helicobacter pylori infection are also made. To classify the scientific evidence and strengthen the recommendations, the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation Working Group) system has been used (http://www.gradeworkinggroup.org/).

[Clinical practice guideline on the management of patients with dyspepsia. Update 2012]

The aim of the Clinical Practice Guideline (CPG) on the Management of Patients with Dyspepsia is to generate recommendations on the optimal approach to dyspepsia in the primary care and specialized outpatient setting. The main objective of this CPG is to help to optimize the diagnostic process, identifying patients with a low risk of a serious organic disease (mainly tumoral), who could be safely managed without the need for invasive diagnostic tests and/or referral to a specialist. The importance of this aim lies in the need to accurately diagnose patients with esophagogastric cancer and correctly treat peptic ulcer while, at the same time, reduce negative endoscopies in order to appropriately use the available healthcare resources.This CPG reviews the initial strategies that can be used in patients with uninvestigated dyspepsia and evaluates the possible decision to begin empirical therapy or to investigate the existence of a lesion that could explain the symptoms. This CPG also discusses functional dyspepsia, which encompasses all patients with dyspepsia with no demonstrable cause on endoscopy. Recommendations for the diagnosis and treatment of peptic ulcer and Helicobacter pylori infection are also made. To classify the scientific evidence and strengthen the recommendations, the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation Working Group) system has been used (http://www.gradeworkinggroup.org/).

Long-term follow-up of 1,000 patients cured of Helicobacter pylori infection following an episode of peptic ulcer bleeding

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effect of Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) eradication on ulcer bleeding recurrence in a prospective, long-term study including 1,000 patients.

METHODS

Patients with peptic ulcer bleeding were prospectively included. Prior non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) use was not considered exclusion criteria. H. pylori infection was confirmed by rapid urease test, histology, or (13)C-urea breath test. Several eradication therapies were used. Subsequently, ranitidine 150 mg o.d. was administered until eradication was confirmed by (13)C-urea breath test 8 weeks after completing therapy. Patients with therapy failure received a second, third, or fourth course of eradication therapy. Patients with eradication success did not receive maintenance anti-ulcer therapy and were controlled yearly with a repeat breath test. NSAID use was not permitted during follow-up.

RESULTS

Thousand patients were followed up for at least 12 months, with a total of 3,253 patient-years of follow-up. Mean age 56 years, 75% males, 41% previous NSAID users. In all, 69% had duodenal ulcer, 27% gastric ulcer, and 4% pyloric ulcer. Recurrence of bleeding was demonstrated in three patients at 1 year (which occurred after NSAID use in two cases, and after H. pylori reinfection in another one), and in two more patients at 2 years (one after NSAID use and another after H. pylori reinfection). The cumulative incidence of rebleeding was 0.5% (95% confidence interval, 0.16-1.16%), and the incidence rate of rebleeding was 0.15% (0.05-0.36%) per patient-year of follow up.

CONCLUSION

Peptic ulcer rebleeding virtually does not occur in patients with complicated ulcers after H. pylori eradication. Maintenance anti-ulcer (antisecretory) therapy is not necessary if eradication is achieved. However, NSAID intake or H. pylori reinfection may exceptionally cause rebleeding in H. pylori-eradicated patients.

Fourth-line rescue therapy with rifabutin in patients with three Helicobacter pylori eradication failures

BACKGROUND

In some cases, Helicobacter pylori infection persists even after three eradication treatments.

AIM

To evaluate the efficacy of an empirical fourth-line rescue regimen with rifabutin in patients with three eradication failures.

DESIGN

Multicentre, prospective study.

PATIENTS

In whom the following three treatments had consecutively failed: first (PPI + clarithromycin + amoxicillin); second (PPI + bismuth + tetracycline + metronidazole); third (PPI + amoxicillin + levofloxacin).

INTERVENTION

A fourth regimen with rifabutin (150 mg b.d.), amoxicillin (1 g b.d.) and a PPI (standard dose b.d.) was prescribed for 10 days.

OUTCOME

Eradication was confirmed by (13) C-urea breath test 4-8 weeks after therapy. Compliance and tolerance: Compliance was determined through questioning and recovery of empty medication envelopes. Adverse effects were evaluated using a questionnaire.

RESULTS

One-hundred patients (mean age 50 years, 39% men, 31% peptic ulcer/69% functional dyspepsia) were included. Eight patients did not take the medication correctly (in six cases due to adverse effects). Per-protocol and intention-to-treat eradication rates were 52% (95% CI = 41-63%) and 50% (40-60%). Adverse effects were reported in 30 (30%) patients: nausea/vomiting (13 patients), asthenia/anorexia (8), abdominal pain (7), diarrhoea (5), fever (4), metallic taste (4), myalgia (4), hypertransaminasemia (2), leucopenia (<1,500 neutrophils) (2), thrombopenia (<150,000 platelets) (2), headache (1) and aphthous stomatitis (1). Myelotoxicity resolved spontaneously in all cases.

CONCLUSIONS

Even after three previous H. pylori eradication failures, an empirical fourth-line rescue treatment with rifabutin may be effective in approximately 50% of the cases. Therefore, rifabutin-based rescue therapy constitutes a valid strategy after multiple previous eradication failures with key antibiotics, such as clarithromycin, metronidazole, tetracycline and levofloxacin.

Helicobacter pylori first-line treatment and rescue option containing levofloxacin in patients allergic to penicillin

AIM

To assess the efficacy and tolerability of Helicobacter pylori first-line treatment (omeprazole-clarithromycin-metronidazole) and second-line rescue option (omeprazole-clarithromycin-levofloxacin) in patients allergic to penicillin.

PATIENTS

Prospective multicenter study including consecutive patients allergic to penicillin. Therapy regimens: First-line treatment (50 patients): Omeprazole (20mg b.i.d.), clarithromycin (500 mg b.i.d.) and metronidazole (500 mg b.i.d.) for 7 days. Second-line treatment (15 therapy failures out of the aforementioned 50 patients): Omeprazole (20mg b.i.d.), clarithromycin (500 mg b.i.d.) and levofloxacin (500 mg b.i.d.) for 10 days.

OUTCOME VARIABLE

Negative (13)C-urea breath test 8 weeks after completion of treatment.

RESULTS

(1) First-line treatment (omeprazole-clarithromycin-metronidazole): Per-protocol and intention-to-treat eradication rates were 55% (27/49; 95%CI=40-70%) and 54% (27/50; 95%CI=39-69%). Compliance with treatment and follow-up was complete in 98% of cases (one patient was not compliant due to nausea). Adverse events were reported in 5 patients (10%): 4 nausea, 1 diarrhoea. (2) Second-line treatment (omeprazole-clarithromycin-levofloxacin): Per-protocol and intention-to-treat eradication rates were both 73% (11/15; 95%CI=45-92%). Compliance with treatment and follow-up was complete in all the cases. Adverse events were reported in 4 patients (20%), which did not prevent the completion of treatment: Mild nausea (2 patients), and vomiting and myalgias/arthralgias (1 patient).

CONCLUSION

In H. pylori infected patients allergic to penicillin, the generally recommended first-line treatment with omeprazole, clarithromycin and metronidazole has low efficacy for curing the infection. On the other hand, a levofloxacin-containing regimen (together with omeprazole and clarithromycin) represents an encouraging second-line alternative in the presence of penicillin allergy.

Empirical rescue therapy after Helicobacter pylori treatment failure: a 10-year single-centre study of 500 patients

BACKGROUND

Several 'rescue' therapies have been recommended to eradicate Helicobacter pylori, but they still fail in >20% of the cases, and these patients constitute a therapeutic dilemma.

AIM

To evaluate the efficacy of different 'rescue' therapies empirically prescribed during 10 years to 500 patients in whom at least one eradication regimen had failed to cure H. pylori infection.

DESIGN

Prospective single-centre study.

PATIENTS

Consecutive patients in whom at least one eradication regimen had failed.

INTERVENTION

Rescue regimens included: (i) quadruple therapy with omeprazole-bismuth-tetracycline-metronidazole; (ii) ranitidine bismuth citrate-tetracycline-metronidazole; (iii) omeprazole-amoxicillin-levofloxacin; and (iv) omeprazole-amoxicillin-rifabutin. Antibiotic susceptibility was unknown (rescue regimens were chosen empirically).

OUTCOME

Eradication was defined as a negative (13)C-urea breath test 4-8 weeks after completing therapy.

RESULTS

Five hundred patients were included (76% functional dyspepsia, 24% peptic ulcer). Compliance rates with first-, second- and third-line regimens were 92%, 92%, and 95%, respectively. Adverse effects were reported by 30%, 37%, and 55% of the patients receiving second-, third-, and fourth-line regimens. Overall, H. pylori cure rates with the second-, third-, and fourth-line rescue regimens were 70%, 74%, and 76%, respectively. Cumulative H. pylori eradication rate with four successive treatments was 99.5%.

CONCLUSION

It is possible to construct an overall treatment strategy to maximize H. pylori eradication, on the basis of administration of four consecutive empirical regimens; thus, performing bacterial culture even after a second or third eradication failure may not be necessary.

Second-line rescue therapy with levofloxacin after H. pylori treatment failure: a Spanish multicenter study of 300 patients

AIM

Quadruple therapy is generally recommended as second-line therapy after Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) eradication failure. However, this regimen requires the administration of four drugs with a complex scheme, is associated with a relatively high incidence of adverse effects, and bismuth salts are not available worldwide anymore. Our aim was to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of a triple second-line levofloxacin-based regimen in patients with H. pylori eradication failure.

DESIGN

Prospective multicenter study.

PATIENTS

in whom a first treatment with proton pump inhibitor-clarithromycin-amoxicillin had failed.

INTERVENTION

A second eradication regimen with levofloxacin (500 mg b.i.d.), amoxicillin (1 g b.i.d.), and omeprazole (20 mg b.i.d.) was prescribed for 10 days.

OUTCOME

Eradication was confirmed with (13)C-urea breath test 4-8 wk after therapy. Compliance with therapy was determined from the interview and the recovery of empty envelopes of medications. Incidence of adverse effects was evaluated by means of a specific questionnaire.

RESULTS

Three hundred consecutive patients were included. Mean age was 48 yr, 47% were male, 38% had peptic ulcer, and 62% functional dyspepsia. Almost all (97%) patients took all the medications correctly. Per-protocol and intention-to-treat eradication rates were 81% (95% CI 77-86%) and 77% (73-82%). Adverse effects were reported in 22% of the patients, mainly including nausea (8%), metallic taste (5%), abdominal pain (3%), and myalgias (3%); none of them were severe.

CONCLUSION

Ten-day levofloxacin-based rescue therapy constitutes an encouraging second-line strategy, representing an alternative to quadruple therapy in patients with previous proton pump inhibitor-clarithromycin-amoxicillin failure, being simple and safe.

First-line triple therapy with levofloxacin for Helicobacter pylori eradication

BACKGROUND

At present, the efficacy of proton pump inhibitor-clarithromycin-amoxicillin regimen is relatively low.

AIM

To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of a first-line triple clarithromycin-free regimen including ranitidine bismuth citrate, levofloxacin and amoxicillin.

DESIGN

Prospective study.

PATIENTS

Helicobacter pylori-positive patients complaining of dyspeptic symptoms referred for gastroscopy.

INTERVENTION

Levofloxacin (500 mg b.d.), amoxicillin (1 g b.d.) and ranitidine bismuth citrate (400 mg b.d.) was prescribed for 10 days.

OUTCOME

Eradication was confirmed by a (13)C-urea breath test 8 weeks after therapy. Compliance with therapy was determined by questioning and the recovery of empty envelopes of medications. Incidence of adverse effects was evaluated by means of a specific questionnaire.

RESULTS

Sixty-four patients were included (30% peptic ulcer, 70% functional dyspepsia). Almost all (97%) patients took all the medications correctly. Per-protocol and intention-to-treat eradication rates were 88.5% (95% CI =78-95%) and 84.4 (74-91%). Adverse effects were reported in 9.5% of the patients, mainly including diarrhoea (7.9%); none of them were severe.

CONCLUSION

This new 10-day levofloxacin-based combination represents an alternative to clarithromycin-based therapy, as it meets the criteria set for regimens used as primary H. pylori treatment: effectiveness (>80%), simplicity (twice-daily dosing and excellent compliance) and safety (low incidence of adverse effects).

Eradication of Helicobacter pylori for the prevention of peptic ulcer rebleeding

AIM

To evaluate the effect of Helicobacter pylori eradication on ulcer bleeding recurrence in a prospective, long-term study including more than 400 patients.

METHODS

Patients with peptic ulcer bleeding were prospectively included. H. pylori infection was confirmed by rapid urease test, histology or (13)C-urea breath test. Several eradication regimens were used. Ranitidine 150 mg was administered daily until eradication was confirmed by breath test 8 weeks after completing eradication therapy. Patients with therapy failure received a second or third course of therapy. Patients with eradication success did not receive maintenance anti-ulcer therapy, and were controlled yearly with a repeated breath test.

RESULTS

Four hundred and twenty-two patients were followed up for at least 12 months, with a total of 906 patient-years of follow up. Mean age was 59 years, and 35% were previous nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) users. Sixty-nine percent had duodenal, 24% gastric, and 7% pyloric ulcer. Recurrence of bleeding was demonstrated in two patients at 1 year (incidence: 0.22% per patient-year of follow up), which occurred after NSAID use in both cases.

CONCLUSION

Peptic ulcer rebleeding does not occur in patients with complicated ulcers after H. pylori eradication. Maintenance anti-ulcer (antisecretory) therapy is not necessary if eradication is achieved.

The health economics of Helicobacter pylori infection

Economic considerations are becoming increasingly important as health care becomes more expensive. Evidence for effectiveness is usually gained from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) but often there is insufficient evidence of the costs of alternative strategies in trials. Often, therefore, economic models are needed to extrapolate data from a variety of sources to give an indication of which strategy is cost effective. Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) testing and treating in a wide variety of upper gastrointestinal diseases is a good example of the application of economic analyses to health care interventions. H. pylori eradication in peptic ulcer disease is very effective with systematic reviews giving a number needed to treat of around two compared to no therapy. RCTs have also suggested that treating H. pylori is also more effective and less expensive than continuous H(2) receptor antagonist therapy and is therefore the dominant strategy in treating peptic ulcer disease. The impact of H. pylori eradication in infected patients with functional dyspepsia is less dramatic, with systematic reviews suggesting a number needed to treat of 14. Economic models suggest that in Europe H. pylori eradication is cost-effective compared to offering no treatment (e.g. in the UK we can be 95% certain this approach is cost effective if you are willing to pay $51/month free from dyspepsia). In the USA it is less certain that this is a cost-effective approach due to the higher cost of eradication therapy. H. pylori test and treat has been proposed as an alternative to early endoscopy in patients with uninvestigated dyspepsia. We have conducted an individual patient data meta-analysis of five RCTs that has addressed the cost effectiveness of this approach. Endoscopy was slightly more effective than H. pylori test and treat at relieving dyspepsia at one year but was not cost-effective as it cost $9000/dyspepsia cure at one year. Population H. pylori test and treat has been proposed as a strategy to prevent noncardia gastric cancer. RCTs have suggested this approach may be cost saving but more data are needed on whether H. pylori eradication will reduce gastric cancer mortality before this strategy can be recommended.

Levofloxacin- vs. ranitidine bismuth citrate-containing therapy after H. pylori treatment failure

AIM

Ranitidine bismuth citrate and levofloxacin-based regimen may be an alternative to quadruple therapy after Helicobacter pylori eradication failure. Our aim was to compare two 7-day triple second-line regimens containing ranitidine bismuth citrate or levofloxacin.

METHODS

Patients in whom a first eradication trial with omeprazole-clarithromycin-amoxicillin had failed were randomized to receive 7-day treatment with: 1, ranitidine bismuth citrate (400 mg b.i.d.), tetracycline (500 mg q.i.d.), and metronidazole (250 mg q.i.d.), or 2, levofloxacin (500 mg b.i.d.), amoxicillin (1 g b.i.d.), and omeprazole (20 mg b.i.d.). Cure rates were evaluated by (13)C-urea breath test.

RESULTS

One-hundred patients were included: 50 received the ranitidine bismuth citrate regimen, and 50 the levofloxacin one. Groups were comparable in terms of demographic variables. Two percent of the patients (one in each group) did not return for follow up. Compliance was similar in both groups (90% took all the medications correctly). Side-effects (only mild/moderate) in the two groups were also comparable (38% with ranitidine bismuth citrate and 36% with levofloxacin). Per-protocol cure rates were 69% (95% CI = 54-80%) in the ranitidine bismuth citrate group, and 71% (57-82%) in the levofloxacin one. Intention-to-treat cure rates were, respectively, 68% (59-79%) and 68% (59-79%) (nonstatistically significant differences).

CONCLUSIONS

Both 7-day ranitidine bismuth citrate- and levofloxacin-containing second-line regimens represent alternatives to quadruple therapy in patients with previous omeprazole-clarithromycin-amoxicillin failure.

Third-line rescue therapy with levofloxacin is more effective than rifabutin rescue regimen after two Helicobacter pylori treatment failures

BACKGROUND

In patients with a first eradication failure, a second (rescue) therapy still fails in > 20% of cases.

AIM

To compare rifabutin and levofloxacin rescue regimens in patients with two consecutive Helicobacter pylori eradication failures.

METHODS

Patients, in whom first treatment with omeprazole-clarithromycin-amoxicillin and a second trial with omeprazole-bismuth-tetracycline-metronidazole (or ranitidine bismuth citrate with these antibiotics) had failed, received 10 days of treatment with either rifabutin (150 mg b.d.) or levofloxacin (500 mg b.d.), plus amoxicillin (1 g b.d.) and omeprazole (20 mg b.d.). Cure rates were evaluated by the (13)C-urea breath test.

RESULTS

Twenty patients received rifabutin, and 20 levofloxacin. All the patients returned for follow-up. Compliance in the rifabutin group was 100%. Four patients in the levofloxacin group did not take the medication correctly (in two cases due to adverse effects: myalgia and rash). Side effects in the rifabutin and levofloxacin groups were reported in 60% and 50% of the cases, respectively. Five patients (25%) treated with rifabutin presented with leucopenia, and six (30%) treated with levofloxacin presented with myalgias. Per-protocol cure rates were 45% (95% confidence interval, 26-66%) in the rifabutin group, and 81% (57-93%) in the levofloxacin group (P < 0.05). Intention-to-treat cure rates were, 45% (26-66%) and 85% (64-95%), respectively (P < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

After two previous H. pylori eradication failures, a 10-day triple levofloxacin-based rescue regimen is more effective than the same regimen with rifabutin.

Clinical trial evaluating amoxicillin and clarithromycin hydrogels (Chitosan-polyacrylic acid polyionic complex) for H. pylori eradication

AIM

It has been suggested that enhancement of amoxicillin or clarithromycin concentration at the gastric tissue may improve the anti-Helicobacter pylori effect of these drugs. This could be achieved by allowing the drug to remain longer in the stomach using dried hydrogels. Our aim was to evaluate the efficacy of an H. pylori eradication regimen including both amoxicillin and clarithromycin hydrogels.

DESIGN

prospective clinical trial.

PATIENTS

with peptic ulcer or functional dyspepsia.

INTERVENTION

7-day rabeprazole-amoxicillin-clarithromycin regimen. In addition, amoxicillin and clarithromycin hydrogels were administered twice daily during the 7 days. The polyionic complex hydrogel was prepared with Chitosan and polyacrylic acid.

OUTCOME

H. pylori eradication was defined as a negative C-urea breath test 8 weeks after completing therapy.

RESULTS

Forty patients were included. One patient did not return for follow-up. Ninety percent of the patients took all the medications correctly. Per-protocol and intention-to-treat eradication rates were 74% (95% CI=58%-86%) and 70% (55%-82%). Mild adverse effects were reported in 4 (10%) patients (diarrhea in 3, and nausea/heartburn in 1).

CONCLUSIONS

Although dried polyionic complexes could serve as suitable candidates for amoxicillin and clarithromycin site-specific delivery in the stomach, its addition does not increase the eradication efficacy of the generally prescribed proton pump inhibitor plus amoxicillin and clarithromycin regimen.

Recurrence of Helicobacter pylori infection after several eradication therapies: long-term follow-up of 1000 patients

AIM

To study the incidence of Helicobacter pylori recurrence, its chronological aspects, and the variables that might influence it.

METHODS

A total of 1000 patients in whom H. pylori had been eradicated were prospectively studied. Therapies were classified as low and high efficacy regimens. Four to eight weeks after completion of therapy, 13C-urea-breath-test was performed, and it was repeated yearly up to 5 years. In some patients, endoscopy with biopsies was also performed to confirm H. pylori eradication.

RESULTS

A total of 1000 patients were included, giving 2744 patient-years of follow-up. Seventy-one H. pylori recurrences were observed (2.6% per patient-year). Probability of being H. pylori-negative at 1 year was 94.7%, and at 5 years 90.7%. In the multivariate analysis, low age (OR: 1.84; 95% CI: 1.04-3.26) and low efficacy therapies (OR: 2.5; 1.23-5.04) correlated with 1-year H. pylori recurrence. Differences were observed when Kaplan-Meier curves were compared depending on age and therapy regimen.

CONCLUSION

Risk of posteradication H. pylori recurrence is higher during the first year, which suggests that most recurrences during this period are recrudescence and not true reinfections. H. pylori recurrence is more frequent in younger patients and in those treated with low efficacy therapies, but is exceptional if high efficacy therapies are used, in which case post-therapy eradication can be safely confirmed at 4 weeks with 13C-urea-breath-test.

Third-line rescue therapy with levofloxacin after two H. pylori treatment failures

AIM

Eradication therapy with proton pump inhibitor, clarithromycin and amoxicillin fails in a considerable number of cases. A rescue therapy still fails in more than 20% of the cases. Our aim was to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of a third-line levofloxacin-based regimen in patients with two consecutive Helicobacter pylori eradication failures.

DESIGN

Prospective multicenter study.

PATIENTS

In whom a first treatment with omeprazole-clarithromycin-amoxicillin and a second with omeprazole-bismuth-tetracycline-metronidazole (or ranitidine bismuth citrate with these antibiotics) had failed.

INTERVENTION

A third eradication regimen with levofloxacin (500 mg b.i.d.), amoxicillin (1 g b.i.d.), and omeprazole (20 mg b.i.d.) was prescribed for 10 days.

OUTCOME

Eradication was confirmed with 13C-urea breath test 4-8 wk after therapy.

RESULTS

One-hundred patients were initially included, and nine were lost for follow-up. All patients but five took all the medications correctly. Per-protocol and intention-to-treat eradication rates were 66% (95% CI = 56-75%) and 60% (50-70%). Adverse effects were reported in 25% of the patients, mainly including metallic taste (8%), nausea (8%), myalgia/arthralgia (5%), and diarrhea (4%); none of them were severe.

CONCLUSION

Levofloxacin-based rescue therapy constitutes an encouraging empirical third-line strategy after multiple previous H. pylori eradication failures with key antibiotics such as amoxicillin, clarithromycin, metronidazole, and tetracycline.

Helicobacter pylori first-line treatment and rescue options in patients allergic to penicillin

BACKGROUND

Helicobacter pylori eradication is a challenge in patients allergic to penicillin, especially those who have failed a first-eradication trial.

AIM

To assess the efficacy and tolerability of H. pylori first-line treatment and rescue options in patients allergic to penicillin.

METHODS

Prospective single centre study including 40 consecutive treatments administered to patients allergic to penicillin. Therapy regimens: First-line (12 patients) omeprazole, clarithromycin and metronidazole for 7 days; second-line (17 patients) ranitidine bismuth citrate, tetracycline and metronidazole for 7 days; third-line (nine patients) rifabutin, clarithromycin and omeprazole for 10 days; and fourth-line (two patients) levofloxacin, clarithromycin and omeprazole for 10 days.

OUTCOME VARIABLE

a negative (13)C-urea breath test 8 weeks after completion of treatment.

RESULTS

Per-protocol/intention-to-treat eradication rates were: first-line (64/58%); second-line (ranitidine bismuth citrate; 53/47%); third-line (rifabutin; 17/11%) and fourth-line regimen (levofloxacin; 100/100%). Compliance with treatment was generally good, except with the rifabutin-based regimen, which presented adverse effects in 89% of the patients, including four cases of myelotoxicity.

CONCLUSIONS

H. pylori-infected patients who are allergic to penicillin may be treated with a first-line treatment combining a proton-pump inhibitor, clarithromycin and metronidazole. Rescue options may include a regimen with ranitidine bismuth citrate, tetracycline and metronidazole. A levofloxacin-based rescue regimen (with proton-pump inhibitor and clarithromycin) may also represent an alternative, even when two or more consecutive eradication treatments have previously failed. However, rifabutin + clarithromycin + proton-pump inhibitor regimen is ineffective and poorly tolerated.

Esomeprazole-based therapy in Helicobacter pylori eradication: any effect by increasing the dose of esomeprazole or prolonging the treatment?

AIM

To study the efficacy of esomeprazole-based triple therapy in Helicobacter pylori eradication and to evaluate, by a randomized trial, the effect of increasing the dose of esomeprazole or prolonging the treatment.

METHODS

Four-hundred and fifty duodenal ulcer patients were randomized to receive: (1) esomeprazole (20 mg b.i.d.), clarithromycin (500 mg b.i.d.), and amoxicillin (1 g b.i.d.), for 7 days (E20-7d); (2) esomeprazole (40 mg b.i.d.) with the same antibiotics, also for 7 days (E40-7d); and (3) esomeprazole (40 mg b.i.d.) with the same antibiotics, for 10 days (E40-10d). Cure rates were evaluated by (13)C-urea breath test.

RESULTS

One-hundred and fifty patients received each treatment. Groups were comparable in terms of demographic variables. Eight percent of the patients did not return for follow-up. Compliance (98%) and side effects (only mild to moderate) in the two groups were comparable. Per-protocol cure rates were 83.5% (E20-7d), 84.8% (E40-7d), and 88.2% (E40-10d). Intention-to-treat cure rates were, respectively, 74%, 78%, and 80% (nonstatistically significant differences).

CONCLUSIONS

Esomeprazole-based triple therapies offer comparable efficacy to omeprazole-based therapies used in previous studies. Increasing the dose of esomeprazole or prolonging the treatment does not improve the results. Therefore, if esomeprazole-based triple therapy is used in duodenal ulcer patients, a regimen with only 20 mg twice daily of esomeprazole and for only 7 days may be sufficient.

Evaluation of a new rapid immunoassay for the detection of Helicobacter pylori in faeces: a prospective pilot study

BACKGROUND

Detection of Helicobacter pylori antigen in faeces is a valid method to diagnose H. pylori infection. Presently available stool tests are performed in the laboratory, and diagnostic report is delayed.

AIM

To evaluate a new rapid stool test in a pre-treatment setting and to compare it with a validated laboratory stool test.

METHODS

A total of 105 patients underwent gastroscopy with brush cytology, and biopsies for histology and rapid urease test, to assess H. pylori presence. Helicobacter pylori-status was considered positive if at least two tests were positive; negative if all tests were negative; indeterminate if one test was positive and two negative. Stool specimens were tested using either a rapid immunoassay kit (ImmunoCard STAT) or a laboratory enzyme immunoassay kit (Hp StAR).

RESULTS

Sixty patients were infected with H. pylori, 44 non-infected, one indeterminate. The sensitivity and specificity of ImmunoCard STAT were 85 and 93%; those of Hp StAR were 88 and 100% (not significant).

CONCLUSIONS

ImmunoCard STAT seems a reliable method for detecting H. pylori in untreated patients. It could replace laboratory stool tests, as it is easy and can be performed quickly. These characteristics might be a breakthrough for diagnosing H. pylori in the doctor's office.