-
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Apr 2016Peptic ulcer disease is the cause of dyspepsia in about 10% of people. Ninety-five percent of duodenal and 70% of gastric ulcers are associated with Helicobacter pylori.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Peptic ulcer disease is the cause of dyspepsia in about 10% of people. Ninety-five percent of duodenal and 70% of gastric ulcers are associated with Helicobacter pylori. Eradication of H. pylori reduces the relapse rate of ulcers but the magnitude of this effect is uncertain. This is an update of Ford AC, Delaney B, Forman D, Moayyedi P. Eradication therapy for peptic ulcer disease in Helicobacter pylori-positive patients. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2006, Issue 2. Art. No.: CD003840. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003840.pub4.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the proportion of peptic ulcers healed and the proportion of participants who remained free from relapse with eradication therapy against placebo or other pharmacological therapies in H. pylori-positive people.To assess the proportion of participants that achieved complete relief of symptoms and improvement in quality of life scores.To compare the incidence of adverse effects/drop-outs (total number for each drug) associated with the different treatments.To assess the proportion of participants in whom successful eradication was achieved.
SEARCH METHODS
In this update, we identified trials by searching the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Ovid MEDLINE (1950 to March 2016) and Ovid EMBASE (1980 to March 2016). To identify further relevant trials, we handsearched reference lists from trials selected by electronic searching, and published abstracts from conference proceedings from the United European Gastroenterology Week (published in Gut) and Digestive Disease Week (published in Gastroenterology). The search was last updated in March 2016. We contacted members of Cochrane Upper GI and Pancreatic Diseases, and experts in the field and asked them to provide details of outstanding clinical trials and any relevant unpublished materials.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We analysed randomised controlled trials of short- and long-term treatment of peptic ulcer disease in H. pylori-positive adults. Participants received at least one week of H. pylori eradication compared with ulcer healing drug, placebo or no treatment. Trials were included if they reported assessment from two weeks onwards.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We collected data on ulcer healing, recurrence, relief of symptoms and adverse effects. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) using both fixed-effect and random-effects models with Review Manager software (RevMan 5.3) based on intention-to-treat analysis as far as possible.
MAIN RESULTS
A total of 55 trials were included for one or more outcomes for this review.In duodenal ulcer healing, eradication therapy was superior to ulcer healing drug (UHD) (34 trials, 3910 participants, RR of ulcer persisting = 0.66, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.58 to 0.76; 381/2286 (adjusted proportion: 12.4%) in eradication therapy plus UHD versus 304/1624 (18.7%) in UHD; low quality evidence) and no treatment (two trials, 207 participants, RR 0.37, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.53; 30/125 (adjusted proportion: 21.7%) in eradication therapy versus 48/82 (58.5%) in no treatment; low quality evidence).In gastric ulcer healing, the differences were imprecise between eradication therapy and UHD (15 trials, 1974 participants, RR 1.23, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.68; 220/1192 (adjusted proportion: 16.0%) in eradication therapy plus UHD versus 102/782 (13.0%) in UHD; very low quality evidence). In preventing duodenal ulcer recurrence the differences were imprecise between maintenance therapy with H.pylori eradication therapy and maintenance therapy with UHD (four trials, 319 participants, RR of ulcer recurring 0.73; 95% CI 0.42 to 1.25; 19/159 (adjusted proportion: 11.9%) in eradication therapy versus 26/160 (16.3%) in UHD; very low quality evidence), but eradication therapy was superior to no treatment (27 trials 2509 participants, RR 0.20, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.26; 215/1501 (adjusted proportion: 12.9%) in eradication therapy versus 649/1008 (64.4%) in no treatment; very low quality evidence).In preventing gastric ulcer recurrence, eradication therapy was superior to no treatment (12 trials, 1476 participants, RR 0.31, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.45; 116/697 (adjusted proportion: 16.3%) in eradication therapy versus 356/679 (52.4%) in no treatment; very low quality evidence). None of the trials reported proportion of people with gastric ulcer not healed after initial therapy between H.pylori eradication therapy and no active treatment or the proportion of people with recurrent gastric ulcer or peptic ulcers during maintenance therapy between H.pylori eradication therapy and ulcer healing drug therapy.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Adding a one to two-week course of H. pylori eradication therapy is an effective treatment for people with H. pylori-positive duodenal ulcer when compared to ulcer healing drugs alone and no treatment. H. pylori eradication therapy is also effective in preventing recurrence of duodenal and gastric ulcer compared to no treatment. There is currently no evidence that H. pylori eradication therapy is an effective treatment in people with gastric ulcer or that it is effective in preventing recurrence of duodenal ulcer compared to ulcer healing drug. However, confidence intervals were wide and significant benefits or harms of H. pylori eradication therapy in acute ulcer healing of gastric ulcers compared to no treatment, and in preventing recurrence of duodenal ulcers compared to ulcer healing drugs cannot be ruled out.
Topics: Adult; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Anti-Ulcer Agents; Drug Therapy, Combination; Duodenal Ulcer; Helicobacter Infections; Helicobacter pylori; Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Stomach Ulcer
PubMed: 27092708
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003840.pub5 -
Prescrire International Jan 2016In patients with gastric or duodenal ulcer associated with Helicobacter pylori, treatment of the infection improves healing and prevents complications and recurrences.... (Review)
Review
In patients with gastric or duodenal ulcer associated with Helicobacter pylori, treatment of the infection improves healing and prevents complications and recurrences. The drug regimen generally consists of a high-dose proton-pump inhibitor (PPI) such as omeprazole plus antibiotics. Using the standard Prescrire methodology, we conducted a review of the literature in order to determine the standard empirical antibiotic regimen for H. pylori infection in adults with gastric or duodenal ulcer in France. In 2015, due to an increase in H. pylori resistance to clarithromycin, a 7-day course of the PPI + clarithromycin + amoxicillin combination is effective in only about 70% of cases. A Cochrane systematic review and meta-analysis of trials involving thousands of patients suggests that prolonging treatment with a PPI + amoxicillin + clarithromycin or a PPI + amoxicillin + metronidazole to 10 or 14 days improves the rate of H. pylori eradication by 5% to 10%. A metanalysis of seven trials including a total of about 1000 patients showed that combination therapy with a PPI + amoxicillin + clarithromycin + metronidazole for 5 days eradicates H. pylori in about 90% of cases, compared to about 80% of cases with a PPI + amoxicillin + clarithromycin given for 7 days. Sequential treatment with amoxicillin for 5 days, followed by clarithromycin + metronidazole for 5 days, has also been tested in thousands of patients. Efficacy and adverse effects were similar to those observed when the same antibiotics were taken simultaneously for 5 days. In randomised trials, replacing clarithromycin or amoxicillin with a fluoroquinolone yielded conflicting results. In 2009, nearly 20% of H. pylori isolates were resistant to levofloxacin in France. Tetracycline has only been evaluated in combination with bismuth. The few available data on doxycycline suggest that its efficacy is similar to that of tetracycline. A fixed-dose combination of bismuth subcitrate potassium + metronidazole + tetracycline is authorised in the European Union for use in combination with omeprazole for 10 days. It seems effective, even in case of clarithromycin resistance. However, bismuth can cause encephalopathy, and its value when added to antibiotics and a PPI is poorly documented. We found no robust comparative data on second-line empirical treatments. In patients with gastric or duodenal ulcer associated with H. pylori, eradication of the bacterium reduces the risk of complications and recurrence. In mid-2015, the choice of antibiotics is based on trials in which the primary endpoint was a negative urea breath test, which is an acceptable surrogate criterion. In previously untreated patients, the first-choice empirical treatment consists of three antibiotics: amoxicillin (2 g daily), clarithromycin (1 g daily) and metronidazole (1 g daily), plus a PPI (in practice, omeprazole 40 mg daily), with each drug taken in two divided doses per day. The antibiotics may be taken either simultaneously for five days, or sequentially (amoxicillin for 5 days, followed by clarithromycin + metronidazole for 5 days). The adverse effects of these antibiotic combinations correspond to those of their component drugs, which mainly consist of gastrointestinal disorders and the disulfiram-like reaction of metronidazole. Amoxicillin can be replaced by a fluoroquinolone in patients allergic to beta-lactam antibiotics, but there is a higher risk of resistance. Tetracycline and doxycycline appear effective, as few H. pylori strains are resistant in vitro. Bismuth can cause encephalopathy and should only be used in special cases.
Topics: Adult; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Anti-Ulcer Agents; Drug Therapy, Combination; Duodenal Ulcer; France; Helicobacter Infections; Helicobacter pylori; Humans; Stomach Ulcer
PubMed: 26942258
DOI: No ID Found -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Aug 2015Nutritional support is an essential component of critical care. Malnutrition has been associated with poor outcomes among patients in intensive care units (ICUs).... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Nutritional support is an essential component of critical care. Malnutrition has been associated with poor outcomes among patients in intensive care units (ICUs). Evidence suggests that in patients with a functional gut, nutrition should be administered through the enteral route. One of the main concerns regarding use of the enteral route is the reduction in gastric motility that is often responsible for limited caloric intake. This increases the risk of aspiration pneumonia as well. Post-pyloric feeding, in which the feed is delivered directly into the duodenum or the jejunum, could solve these issues and provide additional benefits over routine gastric administration of the feed.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of post-pyloric feeding versus gastric feeding for critically ill adults who require enteral tube feeding.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the following databases: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL;2013 Issue 10), MEDLINE (Ovid) (1950 to October 2013), EMBASE (Ovid) (1980 to October 2013) and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) via EBSCO host (1982 to October 2013). We reran the search on 4 February 2015 and will deal with the one study of interest when we update the review.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomized or quasi-randomized controlled trials comparing post-pyloric versus gastric tube feeding in critically ill adults.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We extracted data using the standard methods of the Cochrane Anaesthesia, Critical and Emergency Care Group and separately evaluated trial quality and data extraction as performed by each review author. We contacted trials authors to request missing data.
MAIN RESULTS
We pooled data from 14 trials of 1109 participants in a meta-analysis. Moderate quality evidence suggests that post-pyloric feeding is associated with low rates of pneumonia compared with gastric tube feeding (risk ratio (RR) 0.65, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.51 to 0.84). Low-quality evidence shows an increase in the percentage of total nutrient delivered to the patient by post-pyloric feeding (mean difference (MD) 7.8%, 95% CI 1.43 to 14.18).Evidence of moderate quality revealed no differences in duration of mechanical ventilation or in mortality. Intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay was similar between the two groups. The effect on the time required to achieve the full nutrition target was uncertain (MD -1.99 hours 95% CI -10.97 to 6.99) (very low-quality evidence). We found no evidence suggesting an increase in the rate of complications during insertion or maintenance of the tube in the post-pyloric group (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.19 to 1.364; RR1.63, 95% CI 0.93 to 2.86, respectively); evidence was assessed as being of low quality for both.Risk of bias was generally low in most studies, and review authors expressed concern regarding lack of blinding of the caregiver in most trials.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
We found moderate-quality evidence of a 30% lower rate of pneumonia associated with post-pyloric feeding and low-quality evidence suggesting an increase in the amount of nutrition delivered to these participants. We do not have sufficient evidence to show that other clinically important outcomes such as duration of mechanical ventilation, mortality and length of stay were affected by the site of tube feeding.Low-quality evidence suggests that insertion of a post-pyloric feeding tube appears to be safe and was not associated with increased complications when compared with gastric tube insertion. Placement of the post-pyloric tube can present challenges; the procedure is technically difficult, requiring expertise and sophisticated radiological or endoscopic assistance.We recommend that use of a post-pyloric feeding tube may be preferred for ICU patients for whom placement of the post-pyloric feeding tube is feasible. Findings of this review preclude recommendations regarding the best method for placing the post-pyloric feeding tube. The clinician is left with this decision, which should be based on the policies of institutional facilities and should be made on a case-by-case basis. Protocols and training for bedside placement by physicians or nurses should be evaluated.
Topics: Adult; Critical Illness; Duodenum; Enteral Nutrition; Gastrointestinal Motility; Hospital Mortality; Humans; Jejunum; Length of Stay; Malnutrition; Nutritional Status; Pneumonia, Aspiration; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 26241698
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008875.pub2 -
Journal of Infection in Developing... Jul 2015The varieties of infections caused by Helicobacter pylori may be due to differences in bacterial genotypes and virulence factors as well as environmental and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
The varieties of infections caused by Helicobacter pylori may be due to differences in bacterial genotypes and virulence factors as well as environmental and host-related factors. This study aimed to investigate the prevalence of cagA and vacA genes among H. pylori-infected patients in Iran and analyze their relevance to the disease status between two clinical groups via a meta-analysis method. Different databases including PubMed, ISI, Scopus, SID, Magiran, Science Direct, and Medlib were investigated, and 23 relevant articles from the period between 2001 and 2012 were finally analyzed. The relevant data obtained from these papers were analyzed by a random-effects model. Data were analyzed using R software and STATA. The prevalence of cagA and vacA genes among H. pylori-infected patients was 70% (95% CI, 64-75) and 41% (95% CI, 24.3-57.7), respectively. The prevalence of duodenal ulcers, peptic ulcers, and gastritis among cagA+ individuals was 53% (95% CI, 20-86), 65% (95% CI, 34-97), and 71% (95% CI, 59-84), respectively. Odds ratio (OR) between cagA-positive compared with cagA-negative patients showed a 1.89 (95% CI, 1.38-2.57) risk of ulcers. In conclusion, the frequency of cagA gene among H. pylori strains is elevated in Iran and it seems to be more frequently associated with gastritis. Therefore, any information about cagA and vacA prevalence among different H. pylori-infected clinical groups in the country can help public health authorities to plan preventive policies to reduce the prevalence of diseases associated with H. pylori infection.
Topics: Antigens, Bacterial; Bacterial Proteins; Gastritis; Genotype; Helicobacter Infections; Helicobacter pylori; Humans; Iran; Peptic Ulcer; Prevalence
PubMed: 26230117
DOI: 10.3855/jidc.5970 -
World Journal of Gastroenterology Oct 2014Peptic ulcer disease continues to be issue especially due to its high prevalence in the developing world. Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) infection associated duodenal... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Peptic ulcer disease continues to be issue especially due to its high prevalence in the developing world. Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) infection associated duodenal ulcers should undergo eradication therapy. There are many regimens offered for H. pylori eradication which include triple, quadruple, or sequential therapy regimens. The central aim of this systematic review is to evaluate the evidence for H. pylori therapy from a meta-analytical outlook. The consequence of the dose, type of proton-pump inhibitor, and the length of the treatment will be debated. The most important risk factor for eradication failure is resistance to clarithromycin and metronidazole.
Topics: Anti-Bacterial Agents; Chi-Square Distribution; Drug Administration Schedule; Drug Resistance, Bacterial; Drug Therapy, Combination; Helicobacter Infections; Helicobacter pylori; Humans; Odds Ratio; Peptic Ulcer; Proton Pump Inhibitors; Risk Factors; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 25356018
DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v20.i40.14527 -
The Surgeon : Journal of the Royal... Aug 2014Minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy (MIPD) is a complex procedure, offered to selected patients at institutions highly experienced with the procedure. It is still... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy (MIPD) is a complex procedure, offered to selected patients at institutions highly experienced with the procedure. It is still not clear if this approach may enhance patient recovery and reduce postoperative complications comparing to open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD), as demonstrated for other abdominal procedures.
METHODS
A systematic literature review was conducted to identify studies comparing MIPD and OPD. Perioperative outcomes (e.g., morbidity and mortality, pancreatic fistula rates, blood loss) constituted the study end points. Metaanalyses were performed using a random-effects model.
RESULTS
For the metaanalysis, 8 studies including 204 patients undergoing MIPD and 419 patients undergoing OPD were considered suitable. The patients in the two groups were similar with respect to age, sex and histological diagnosis, and different with respect to tumor size, rate of pylorus preservation, and type of pancreatic anastomosis. There were no statistically significant differences between MIPD and OPD regarding development of delayed gastric emptying (DGE), pancreatic fistula, wound infection, or rates of reoperation and overall mortality. MIDP resulted in lower post-operative complication rates, less intra-operative blood loss, shorter hospital stays, lower blood transfusion rates, higher numbers of harvested lymph nodes, and improved negative margin status rates. However, MIPD was associated with longer operating times when compared to OPD.
CONCLUSIONS
The MIPD procedure is feasible, safe, and effective in selected patients. MIPD may have some potential advantages over OPD, and should be performed and further developed by use in selected patients at highly experienced medical centers.
Topics: Duodenal Diseases; Humans; Laparotomy; Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures; Pancreatic Diseases; Pancreaticoduodenectomy; Robotics; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 24525404
DOI: 10.1016/j.surge.2014.01.006 -
Journal of Clinical Gastroenterology Sep 2014By systematic review, we assessed the impact of fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) for the treatment of Clostridium difficile (CD)-associated diarrhea. (Review)
Review
GOAL
By systematic review, we assessed the impact of fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) for the treatment of Clostridium difficile (CD)-associated diarrhea.
BACKGROUND
Fecal microbiota microbiota transplantation from a healthy donor into an individual with CD infection (CDI) can resolve symptoms.
STUDY
We conducted systematic searches in PubMed, SCOPUS, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library. The last search was run on February 8, 2013. The following Medical Subject Headings terms and keywords were used alone or in combination: Clostridium difficile; Clostridium infection; pseudomembranous colitis; feces; stools; fecal suspension; fecal transplantation; fecal transfer; fecal infusion; microbiota; bacteriotherapy; enema; nasogastric tube; colonoscopy; gastroscopy; fecal donation; donor. A critical appraisal of the clinical research evidence on the effectiveness and safety of FMT for the treatment of patients with CD-associated diarrhea was made.
RESULTS
Twenty full-text case series, 15 case reports, and 1 randomized controlled study were included for the final analysis. Almost all patients treated with donors' fecal infusion experienced recurrent episodes of CD-associated diarrhea despite standard antibiotic treatment. Of a total of 536 patients treated, 467 (87%) experienced resolution of diarrhea. Diarrhea resolution rates varied according to the site of infusion: 81% in the stomach; 86% in the duodenum/jejunum; 93% in the cecum/ascending colon; and 84% in the distal colon. No severe adverse events were reported with the procedure.
CONCLUSIONS
FMT seems efficacious and safe for the treatment of recurrent CDI. Hospitals should encourage the development of fecal transplantation programs to improve therapy of local patients.
Topics: Anti-Bacterial Agents; Clostridioides difficile; Clostridium Infections; Diarrhea; Feces; Humans; Microbiota; Recurrence; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 24440934
DOI: 10.1097/MCG.0000000000000046