ObjectiveThe best approach for Helicobacter pylori management remains unclear. An audit process is essential to ensure clinical practice is aligned with best standards of care.DesignInternational multicentre prospective non-interventional registry starting in 2013 aimed to evaluate the decisions and outcomes in H. pylori management by European gastroenterologists. Patients were registered in an e-CRF by AEG-REDCap. Variables included demographics, previous eradication attempts, prescribed treatment, adverse events and outcomes. Data monitoring was performed to ensure data quality. Time-trend and geographical analyses were performed.Results30 394 patients from 27 European countries were evaluated and 21 533 (78%) first-line empirical H. pylori treatments were included for analysis. Pretreatment resistance rates were 23% to clarithromycin, 32% to metronidazole and 13% to both. Triple therapy with amoxicillin and clarithromycin was most commonly prescribed (39%), achieving 81.5% modified intention-to-treat eradication rate. Over 90% eradication was obtained only with 10-day bismuth quadruple or 14-day concomitant treatments. Longer treatment duration, higher acid inhibition and compliance were associated with higher eradication rates. Time-trend analysis showed a region-dependent shift in prescriptions including abandoning triple therapies, using higher acid-inhibition and longer treatments, which was associated with an overall effectiveness increase (84%–90%).ConclusionManagement of H. pylori infection by European gastroenterologists is heterogeneous, suboptimal and discrepant with current recommendations. Only quadruple therapies lasting at least 10 days are able to achieve over 90% eradication rates. European recommendations are being slowly and heterogeneously incorporated into routine clinical practice, which was associated with a corresponding increase in effectiveness.
Brglez Jurecic 14 | José María Huguet 15 | Noelia Alcaide 16 | Irina Voynovan 17 | José María Botargues Bote 18 | Inés Modolell 19 | Jorge Pérez Lasala 20 | Inés Ariño 21 | Laimas Jonaitis 22 | Manuel Dominguez-Cajal 23 | György Buzas 24 | Frode Lerang 25 | Monica Perona 26 | Dmitry Bordin 17 | Toni Axon 27 | Antonio Gasbarrini 28 | Ricardo Marcos Pinto 29 | Yaron Niv 30 | Limas Kupcinskas 22 | Ante Tonkic 31 | Marcis Leja 32 | Theodore Rokkas 33 | Lyudmila Boyanova 34 | Oleg Shvets 35 | Marino Venerito 36 | Peter Bytzer 37 | Adrian Goldis 38 | Ilkay Simsek 39 | Vincent Lamy 40 | Krzysztof Przytulski 41 | Lumír Kunovský 42 | Lisette Capelle 43 | Tomica Milosavljevic 44 | María Caldas 1 | Ana Garre 1 | Francis Mégraud 45 | Colm O'Morain 46 | Javier P. Gisbert 1 | On behalf of the Hp-EuReg Investigators Abstract Background: Experience in Helicobacter pylori eradication treatment of patients allergic to penicillin is very scarce. A triple combination with a PPI, clarithromycin (C), and metronidazole (M) is often prescribed as the first option, although more recently the use of a quadruple therapy with PPI, bismuth (B), tetracycline (T), and M has been recommended. Aim: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of first-line and rescue treatments in patients allergic to penicillin in the "European Registry of H pylori management" (Hp-EuReg). Methods: A systematic prospective registry of the clinical practice of European gastroenterologists (27 countries, 300 investigators) on the management of H pylori infection. An e-CRF was created on AEG-REDCap. Patients with penicillin allergy were analyzed until June 2019. Results: One-thousand eighty-four patients allergic to penicillin were analyzed. The Additional supporting information may be found online in the Supporting Information section. How to cite this article: Nyssen OP, Perez-Aisa Á, Tepes B, et al; On behalf of the Hp-EuReg Investigators. Helicobacter pylori first-line and rescue treatments in patients allergic to penicillin: Experience from the European Registry on H pylori management (Hp-EuReg). Helicobacter. 2020;25:e12686.
INTRODUCTION:
The safety of Helicobacter pylori eradication treatments and to what extent adverse events (AEs) influence therapeutic compliance in clinical practice are hardly known. Our aim was to assess the frequency, type, intensity, and duration of AEs, and their impact on compliance, for the most frequently used treatments in the “European Registry on Helicobacter pylori management.”
METHODS:
Systematic prospective noninterventional registry of the clinical practice of European gastroenterologists (27 countries, 300 investigators) on the management of H. pylori infection in routine clinical practice. All prescribed eradication treatments and their corresponding safety profile were recorded. AEs were classified depending on the intensity of symptoms as mild/moderate/severe and as serious AEs. All data were subject to quality control.
RESULTS:
The different treatments prescribed to 22,492 patients caused at least 1 AE in 23% of the cases; the classic bismuth-based quadruple therapy was the worst tolerated (37% of AEs). Taste disturbance (7%), diarrhea (7%), nausea (6%), and abdominal pain (3%) were the most frequent AEs. The majority of AEs were mild (57%), 6% were severe, and only 0.08% were serious, with an average duration of 7 days. The treatment compliance rate was 97%. Only 1.3% of the patients discontinued treatment due to AEs. Longer treatment durations were significantly associated with a higher incidence of AEs in standard triple, concomitant, bismuth quadruple, and levofloxacin triple or quadruple therapies.
DISCUSSION:
Helicobacter pylori eradication treatment frequently induces AEs, although they are usually mild and of limited duration. Their appearance does not interfere significantly with treatment compliance.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.