Abstract
Background
Sequential and concomitant therapies are two innovative therapies for Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) eradication. However, the comparative efficacy and safety of these treatments are controversial. Therefore, we aimed to conduct an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of studies that compared these two treatments.
Methods
A search of PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science was carried out. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared sequential with concomitant therapies were selected for meta-analysis.
Results
Twenty RCTs were included in the analysis. The eradication rate of 10-day sequential therapy was superior to that of 5-day concomitant therapy (82.09 versus 77.79%, relative risk (RR) 1.052 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.004–1.103), P = 0.035)), similar to that of 7-day concomitant therapy (82.40 versus 86.99%, RR 0.959 (95% CI 0.874–1.053), P = 0.382), and inferior to that of 10-day concomitant therapy (78.39 versus 83.32%, RR 0.945 (95% CI 0.907–0.984, P = 0.006); the occurrence of diarrhea was higher in 10-day concomitant therapy than that in 10-day sequential therapy. Compared with the eradication rate of sequential therapy, that of concomitant therapy was higher in metronidazole-resistant strains (RR 0.912 (95% CI 0.844–0.986, P = 0.020)) and strains resistant to metronidazole and clarithromycin (RR 0.542 (95% CI 0.308–0.956, P = 0.035)).
Conclusion
The efficacy of concomitant therapy was duration dependent, and 10-day concomitant therapy was superior to 10-day sequential therapy. Compared to sequential therapy, concomitant therapy was more efficacious for metronidazole-resistant strains and metronidazole plus clarithromycin-resistant strains. However, diarrhea was more frequent with concomitant therapy than with sequential therapy.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Introduction
Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) is a global human pathogen that plays important roles in certain gastrointestinal diseases, such as peptic ulcers, chronic gastritis, gastric cancer, and gastric malignant disease [1,2,3]. H. pylori infection remains one of the most common human infections worldwide, particularly in developing countries [4, 5]. In the previous decade, the most widely recommended approach for eradicating H. pylori was the standard triple therapy consisting of a proton pump inhibitor (PPI), amoxicillin, and clarithromycin or metronidazole [6, 7]. Unfortunately, the high success rates initially reported for conventional triple therapy have been eroded by the increasing prevalence of antibiotic resistance. Currently, the success of triple therapy has decreased to 80% or less in most countries [8, 9].
These data have led to the pursuit of strategies to improve H. pylori treatment efficacy. One recent innovation postulated as an alternative to standard triple therapy is sequential treatment, which was introduced in Italy by Zullo et al. [10] and consists of a 5-day induction phase with amoxicillin and a PPI, immediately followed by 5 days of triple therapy (metronidazole, clarithromycin, and PPI). Studies have also recommended tinidazole or other antibiotics instead of metronidazole [11], and several studies support the sequential treatment strategy as a standard first-line treatment for H. pylori infection [12,13,14].
Another therapeutic innovation for the treatment of H. pylori infection is concomitant therapy. In 1998, investigators from Germany and Japan proposed a short-term, 4-drug regimen (a PPI, clarithromycin, metronidazole, and amoxicillin) to be administered concomitantly as a non-sequential, 3-antibiotic, non-bismuth-containing quadruple therapy [15, 16]. This treatment paradigm has recently reappeared, with a prolonged 10-day or longer duration, as a valid, simple, and widely available first-line treatment option [17, 18].
Several studies have focused on the efficacy and safety of these two therapies; however, their results are controversial. Three meta-analyses showed similar efficacies for sequential and concomitant therapies [19,20,21], whereas the Maastricht V/Florence Consensus Report insists that concomitant therapy should be the preferred non-bismuth quadruple therapy and is the most effective in overcoming antibiotic resistance because the efficacy of concomitant therapy is duration dependent [22]. These three meta-analyses were published in 2013 and 2015, and less than 10 studies were employed in their analyses. Regarding analyses between different therapy durations, there are fewer studies providing reliable results for their conclusions. To further explore the efficacies of concomitant and sequential therapies, we present an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of the evidence published to date regarding the potential efficacy and safety of these two therapies.
Methods
The systematic review and meta-analysis were performed following the recommendations of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systemic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement [23].
Information sources
We searched PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Web of Science (until February 2017).
Search terms
The search strategy was not limited by language, and the search terms included H. pylori, sequential, concomitant, and non-bismuth quadruple. The search terms used in the PubMed database were as follows: (Helicobacter pylori or H. pylori) and sequential and (concomitant or “non-bismuth quadruple”).
Study selection
Articles eligible for inclusion in the meta-analysis met the following inclusion criteria: (1) randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published as full texts; (2) articles that included at least two branches of treatment consisting of (i) concomitant therapy and (ii) sequential therapy; (3) studies in which H. pylori infection was determined using one or more of the standard detection methods (urea breath tests (UBT), rapid urease test (RUT), histology, bacterial culture or fecal antigen testing); (4) studies in which the H. pylori eradication rate was determined at least 4 weeks after the completion of the eradication regimen; (5) studies in which the eradication rate was obtainable; and (6) studies in which the patients were naïve to therapy.
Data collection process
Two independent reviewers (W-YH and Z-RL) extracted the data from the selected studies; a third investigator resolved disagreements (W-B).
Data items
The following data were extracted into a predefined data extraction form (Tables 1, 2, and 3): the author and published year, country of the trial, eradication regimens, duration of treatments, test used to confirm persistent infection prior to study enrollment and the eradication of infection after the completion of treatment, number of patients in each treatment arm by intention-to-treat analysis (ITT) and per-protocol (PP) analysis, number of patients with successful eradication determined by ITT and PP analyses, number of strains with primary resistance to antibiotics, number of patients with eradicated infections of resistant strains, number of patients who experienced adverse effects, and compliance rates of the two therapies.
Risk of bias in individual studies
The risk of bias was evaluated by two independent reviewers (W-YH and Z-RL) according to the risk of bias assessment tool developed by the Cochrane Collaboration [44]. The criteria referred to the characteristics of studies that may be related to random sequence generation, allocation concealment, performance bias (blinding of participants and personnel), detection bias (blinding of the outcome assessment), attrition bias (incomplete outcome data), and reporting bias (selective outcome reporting). Each criterion was scored as yes (Y), no (N), or unclear (U), where “yes” indicated a low risk of bias, “no” indicated a high risk of bias, and “unclear” indicated an uncertain risk of bias. A third investigator (W-B) resolved disagreements.
Summary measurements
Data analysis was performed using Stata meta-analysis software, version 12.0 (StataCorp LP, College Station, TX). The relative risks (RRs) were presented with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and were calculated based on a random-effects model as described by Mantel-Haenszel. P values less than 0.05 were considered statistically significant.
Synthesis of results
The primary study outcome for the meta-analysis was the eradication rate of sequential therapy compared with that of concomitant therapy, and the secondary end points were the adverse effects of and compliance with sequential therapy compared with those for concomitant therapy. The study end points were calculated using ITT and PP analyses. We estimated the degree of heterogeneity among the trial results using χ 2 statistics (with P values less than 0.10 considered significant) and the I 2 test (25, 50, and 75% represented low, moderate, and high heterogeneity, respectively).
Sensitivity analysis
Sensitivity was analyzed using Stata meta-analysis software. The stability of the results was evaluated by removing articles with high heterogeneity and reporting bias, as these articles may substantially affect the results.
Risk of bias across studies
The presence of publication bias was assessed using Egger’s test; P values less than 0.10 were considered significant.
Results
Selection of studies
The literature search yielded 591 studies, which were reviewed with full text and/or abstracts. Among these studies, duplication checking was performed using the software “NoteExpress, standard version 3.0” (Beijing, China), according to the publication year, title of the article, and the name of the author. After the first step of the duplicate article elimination, 286 records remained. We subsequently checked the abstracts or full texts of these records, and only clinical investigations that included at least two branches of treatment consisting of (i) concomitant therapy and (ii) sequential therapy were included. After this process, 25 records remained. Among these articles, two studies were excluded because of data repetition [45, 46], one study was excluded because of the lack of raw data [47], one study was excluded because the method used to detect H. pylori infection was obscure [48], and one study was excluded because it did not conform to an RCT [49]. Finally, 20 RCTs met the inclusion criteria and were included for further analysis. A flowchart of the multi-step exclusion process is presented in Fig. 1.
Study characteristics
Twenty studies were used after rigorous filtering. Of these studies, nine studies evaluated the eradication rate by comparing sequential therapy with concomitant therapy [49]; six studies compared the efficacies of triple, sequential, and concomitant therapies [24, 28,29,30, 34, 38]; and two studies compared the efficacies of hybrid, sequential, and concomitant therapies [26, 27]. Two studies compared bismuth-containing quadruple therapy, sequential therapy, and concomitant therapy [37, 41]. One study compared five different regimens [35]. Considering the objective of our meta-analysis, the data that compared sequential therapy with concomitant therapy were analyzed. Of all studies, 18 studies performed 10-day sequential therapies, and 2 studies performed 14-day sequential therapies; however, the duration of concomitant therapy varied among these articles. To reduce the heterogeneity of the meta-analysis, we did not pool the result of concomitant therapies with different durations. A total of 5697 patients were randomized to the two groups (Table 1).
Risk of bias within studies
Among these 20 studies, all studies were published as full-text publications with methodological details reported. Seventeen studies reported methods for sequence generation. Five studies described methods for allocation concealment. None of the studies described methods for blinding of the participants. Three of the studies provided methods for blinding of the outcome assessment. None of the studies provided incomplete outcome data. In addition, seven studies had a low risk of reporting bias (Table 2).
Synthesis of results
10-day sequential versus 5-day concomitant therapy
Primary outcome: H. pylori eradication rates
We identified four studies that compared the efficacy of concomitant therapy with sequential therapy in H. pylori eradication, which reported data from 1555 participants (776 participants who underwent sequential therapy and 779 participants who underwent concomitant therapy). There was low heterogeneity among these studies (P = 0.344; I 2 = 9.9%). The meta-analysis showed that the eradication rate of 5-day concomitant therapy was lower than that of 10-day sequential therapy when pooled as ITT data, the relative risk (RR) was 1.052 (95% CI 1.004–1.103, P = 0.035) (Fig. 2a), and the eradication rates were 82.09% for sequential therapy and 77.79% for concomitant therapy (four RCTs). However, when calculating the PP data, the pooled RR was 1.027 (95% CI 0.957–1.101, P = 0.463), and the eradication rates were 93.97% for sequential therapy and 90.77% for concomitant therapy (3 RCTs).
Risk of bias across studies
Egger’s test (P = 0.197) suggested that there were no significant biases across the studies.
10-day sequential versus 7-day concomitant therapy
Primary outcome: H. pylori eradication rates
We identified three studies that compared the efficacy of concomitant therapy with sequential therapy in H. pylori eradication, which reported data from 784 participants (392 participants who underwent sequential therapy and 392 participants who underwent concomitant therapy). There was a moderate heterogeneity among these studies (P = 0.040; I 2 = 69.0%). The meta-analysis showed that the eradication rate of 7-day concomitant therapy was not inferior to that of 10-day sequential therapy when pooled as ITT data, the RR was 0.959 (95% CI 0.874–1.053, P = 0.382) (Fig. 2b), and the eradication rates were 82.40% for sequential therapy and 86.99% for concomitant therapy (three RCTs). When calculating the PP data, the pooled RR was 0.997 (95% CI 0.928–1.071, P = 0.930) and the eradication rates were 93.55% for sequential therapy and 94.06% for concomitant therapy (two RCTs).
Risk of bias across studies
Egger’s test (P = 0.129) suggested there were no significant biases across the studies.
Secondary outcome: side effects
Data on adverse events were available for three trials. There was low heterogeneity among these studies (P = 0.424; I 2 = 0.0%). There were no significant differences in the occurrence of side effects between sequential therapy and concomitant therapy. The ITT pooled RR was 0.931 (95% CI 0.785–1.106, P = 0.417) (three RCTs).
10-day sequential versus 10-day concomitant therapy
Primary outcome: H. pylori eradication rates
We identified 12 studies that compared the efficacy of concomitant therapy with sequential therapy in H. pylori eradication, which reported data from 3010 participants (1481 participants who underwent sequential therapy and 1529 participants who underwent concomitant therapy). There was moderate heterogeneity among these studies (P = 0.157; I 2 = 29.5%). The meta-analysis showed that the eradication rate of 10-day concomitant therapy was superior to that of 10-day sequential therapy when pooled as ITT data, the RR was 0.945 (95% CI 0.907–0.984, P = 0.006) (12 RCTs) (Fig. 2c), and the eradication rates were 78.39% for sequential therapy and 83.32% for concomitant therapy. When calculating the PP data, the pooled RR was 0.950 (95% CI 0.922–0.979, P = 0.001) (12 RCTs), and the eradication rates were 86.38% for sequential therapy and 91.36% for concomitant therapy.
Risk of bias across studies
Egger’s test (P = 0.513) suggested there were no significant biases across the studies.
Sensitivity analysis
Regarding the sensitivity analysis, the outcome was stable.
Secondary outcome: side effects and compliance
Data on adverse events were available from eight of the included trials; these trials reported data from 1957 participants (1035 participants who received sequential therapy and 1034 participants who received concomitant therapy). There was low heterogeneity among these studies (P = 0.683; I 2 = 0%). There were no significant differences in the occurrence of side effects between sequential therapy and concomitant therapy. The ITT pooled RR was 0.942 (95% CI 0.863–1.030, P = 0.189) (eight RCTs) (Fig. 3a). When considering severe side effects, the pooled RR was 0.597 (95% CI 0.328–1.087, P = 0.091). Regarding the sensitivity analysis, the outcome was stable. In addition, we analyzed side effects, such as abdominal pain, diarrhea, bloating, nausea, vomiting, anorexia, dizziness, bitter taste, headache, and general weakness, between the two therapies. Only the occurrence of diarrhea was higher for the concomitant therapy than that for sequential therapy, with an ITT pooled RR of 0.606 (95% CI 0.444–0.827, P = 0.002) (eight RCTs) (Fig. 3b); the other side effects were not significantly different between the two treatments.
Data on compliance were available from 11 of the 12 trials. There was low heterogeneity among these studies (P = 0.487; I 2 = 0.00%). No significant differences in compliance were identified between the sequential and concomitant therapies, and the pooled RR was 0.994 (95% CI 0982–1.006) (Fig. 3c).
Sequential versus 14-day concomitant therapy
We identified three studies that compared the efficacy of concomitant therapy with sequential therapy in H. pylori eradication, which reported data from 554 participants (280 participants who underwent sequential therapy and 274 participants who underwent concomitant therapy). Among these three studies, one study compared 10-day sequential therapy versus 14-day concomitant therapy and two studies compared 14-day sequential therapy versus 14-day concomitant therapy. Ten-day sequential therapy did not significantly differ from 14-day concomitant therapy. When we pooled 14-day sequential therapy versus 14-day concomitant therapy, there was low heterogeneity among these studies (P = 0.918; I 2 = 0.0%). The meta-analysis showed that the eradication rate of 14-day concomitant therapy was similar to that of 14-day sequential therapy, the RR was 0.941 (95% CI 0.837–1.058, P = 0.311) (Fig. 2d), and the eradication rates were 74.71% for sequential therapy and 79.27% for concomitant therapy. When calculating the PP data, the pooled RR was 0.962 (95% CI 0.897–1.031, P = 0.270), and the eradication rates were 93.02% for sequential therapy and 96.41% for concomitant therapy (two RCTs).
Ability to overcome antibiotic resistance
Seven studies provided data to investigate the role of primary resistance in the eradication of H. pylori infection, whereas one study did not analyze treatment outcome stratified according to antibiotic resistance profiles and treatment arms [50]. Six studies were included in the analysis, and the data are summarized in Table 3. When comparing the eradication rate of metronidazole-resistant strains, the results showed that the eradication rate of concomitant therapy was superior to that of sequential therapy, 85.71 versus 95.71%, respectively, RR 0.912 (95% CI 0.844–0.986, P = 0.020) (Fig. 4a). Regarding the eradication rates of clarithromycin-resistant strains, the eradication rates of the two therapies were similar, 74.55 versus 88.46%, respectively, RR 0.886 (95% CI 0.745–1.055, P = 0.174) (Fig. 4b). When considering the eradication rates of clarithromycin and metronidazole dual-resistant strains, the data showed that the eradication rate of concomitant therapy was superior to that of sequential therapy, 50.00 versus 79.17%, respectively, RR 0.542 (95% CI 0.308–0.956, P = 0.035) (Fig. 4c).
Discussion
Sequential therapy was proposed by Italian investigators in 2000 [10]. This regimen has been postulated to replace standard triple therapy, particularly in patients with dual resistance (clarithromycin and imidazole), precluding the use of standard triple therapy [3, 51]. Studies have also suggested that a long duration of amoxicillin administration would decrease the bacterial load and disrupt the efflux pump, thereby preventing clarithromycin resistance [52]. In concomitant therapy, four drugs (a PPI and three antibiotics) are administered together. This regimen is implemented as a first-line therapy when high clarithromycin resistance is present and bismuth is not locally available [51]. Compared with sequential therapy, concomitant therapy appears to reduce the complexity of the regimen [53].
This meta-analysis provides evidence of the safety and efficacy of sequential therapy versus concomitant therapy for H. pylori infection. The main findings of this study were that the eradication rate of 10-day sequential therapy was superior to that of 5-day concomitant therapy, similar to that of 7-day concomitant therapy, and inferior to that of 10-day concomitant therapy, which indicates a duration-dependent efficacy of concomitant therapy. A different result was obtained when comparing sequential therapy with 14-day concomitant therapy. The similar eradication rates of the two treatments may be a result of the increased duration of both therapies, according to Yeo et al. [54]. Fourteen-day sequential therapy has a higher eradication rate than sequential therapy at a duration ≤ 10 days (OR = 1.84, 95% CI 1.17–2.29); thus, prolonging the duration from 10 days to 14 days may improve the eradication rate of sequential therapy more than concomitant therapy.
When we compared the safety and compliance of 10-day sequential therapy with 10-day concomitant therapy, there were no significant differences regarding the total number of side effects; however, the occurrence of diarrhea was higher in concomitant therapy than in sequential therapy. This phenomenon may be a result of the use of three antibiotics administered together, which influence the microbiota in the gut; a normal microbiota environment is important to degrade undigested carbohydrates to short-chained fatty acids and protect the host from harm caused by conditional pathogenic bacteria in the gut [55]. The compliance was similar between these two regimens. We did not compare the safety and compliance of sequential therapy with 5-day or 14-day concomitant therapy because of the limited data available to perform the analysis.
Besides, previous research has demonstrated that combining three antibiotics in concomitant therapy may more effectively overcome antibiotic resistance [56], and the Maastricht V/Florence Consensus Report suggests that concomitant therapy is the most effective approach in overcoming antibiotic resistance. We also identified positive evidence to support this viewpoint in the current study. When compared with sequential therapy, concomitant therapy was less affected by metronidazole resistance and dual resistance (metronidazole and clarithromycin resistance). Regarding clarithromycin resistance, although there were no significant differences between the two therapies, the results showed that the eradication rates of the two therapies were 74.9 versus 89.2%, respectively, RR 0.854 (95% CI 0.709–1.028), which is an approximately 15% difference (a clinically relevant difference), with a marginal statistical significance; this finding strongly suggests a low statistical power as a result of a small sample size. To increase the sample size, we pooled the data from 7-day concomitant therapy, which would increase the heterogeneity of the results; however, concomitant therapy continued to exhibit a superior result to sequential therapy.
Conclusion
The efficacy of concomitant therapy was duration dependent, and 10-day concomitant therapy was superior to 10-day sequential therapy. Compared to sequential therapy, concomitant therapy was more effective for metronidazole- and dual clarithromycin and metronidazole-resistant strains. However, diarrhea was more frequent with concomitant therapy than with sequential therapy.
References
Malfertheiner P, Chan FK, McColl KE (2009) Peptic ulcer disease. Lancet 374:1449–1461. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(09)60938-7
Suerbaum S, Michetti P (2002) Helicobacter pylori infection. N Engl J Med 347:1175–1186. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMra020542
Gisbert JP, Calvet X (2011) Review article: non-bismuth quadruple (concomitant) therapy for eradication of Helicobater pylori. Aliment Pharm Ther 34:604–617
Tonkic A, Tonkic M, Lehours P, Megraud F (2012) Epidemiology and diagnosis of Helicobacter pylori infection. Helicobacter 17(Suppl 1):1–8. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-5378.2012.00975.x
Rizwan M, Fatima N, Alvi A (2014) Epidemiology and pattern of antibiotic resistance in Helicobacter pylori: Scenario from Saudi Arabia. Saudi J Gastroenterol 20:212–218. https://doi.org/10.4103/1319-3767.136935
Chey WD, Wong BC (2007) American College of Gastroenterology guideline on the management of Helicobacter pylori infection. Am J Gastroenterol 102:1808–1825. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1572-0241.2007.01393.x
Georgopoulos SD, Papastergiou V, Karatapanis S (2013) Current options for the treatment of Helicobacter pylori. Expert Opin Pharmacother 14:211–223. https://doi.org/10.1517/14656566.2013.763926
Graham DY, Fischbach L (2010) Helicobacter pylori treatment in the era of increasing antibiotic resistance. Gut 59:1143–1153. https://doi.org/10.1136/gut.2009.192757
Iwanczak F, Iwanczak B (2012) Treatment of Helicobacter pylori infection in the aspect of increasing antibiotic resistance. Adv Clin Exp Med 21:671–680
Zullo A, Rinaldi V, Winn S, Meddi P, Lionetti R, Hassan C, Ripani C et al (2000) A new highly effective short-term therapy schedule for Helicobacter pylori eradication. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 14:715–718
Romano M, Cuomo A, Gravina AG, Miranda A, Iovene MR, Tiso A, Sica M et al (2010) Empirical levofloxacin-containing versus clarithromycin-containing sequential therapy for Helicobacter pylori eradication: a randomised trial. Gut 59:1465–1470. https://doi.org/10.1136/gut.2010.215350
Liou JM, Chen CC, Chen MJ, Chen CC, Chang CY, Fang YJ, Lee JY et al (2013) Sequential versus triple therapy for the first-line treatment of Helicobacter pylori: a multicentre, open-label, randomised trial. Lancet 381:205–213. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(12)61579-7
Yoon H, Lee DH, Kim N, Park YS, Shin CM, Kang KK, Oh DH et al (2013) Meta-analysis: is sequential therapy superior to standard triple therapy for Helicobacter pylori infection in Asian adults? J Gastroenterol Hepatol 28:1801–1809. https://doi.org/10.1111/jgh.12397
O’Connor A, Vaira D, Gisbert JP, O’Morain C (2014) Treatment of Helicobacter pylori Infection 2014. Helicobacter 19(Suppl 1):38–45. https://doi.org/10.1111/hel.12163
Treiber G, Ammon S, Schneider E, Klotz U (1998) Amoxicillin/metronidazole/omeprazole/clarithromycin: a new, short quadruple therapy for Helicobacter pylori eradication. Helicobacter 3:54–58
Okada M, Oki K, Shirotani T, Seo M, Okabe N, Maeda K, Nishimura H et al (1998) A new quadruple therapy for the eradication of Helicobacter pylori. Effect of pretreatment with omeprazole on the cure rate. J Gastroenterol 33:640–645
Heo J, Jeon SW, Jung JT, Kwon JG, Kim EY, Lee DW, Seo HE et al (2014) A randomised clinical trial of 10-day concomitant therapy and standard triple therapy for Helicobacter pylori eradication. Dig Liver Dis 46:980–984. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dld.2014.07.018
Kanizaj TF, Kunac N (2014) Helicobacter pylori: future perspectives in therapy reflecting three decades of experience. World J Gastroenterol 20:699–705. https://doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v20.i3.699
He L, Deng T, Luo H (2015) Meta-analysis of sequential, concomitant and hybrid therapy for Helicobacter pylori eradication. Intern Med 54:703–710. https://doi.org/10.2169/internalmedicine.54.3442
Kim JS, Park SM, Kim BW (2015) Sequential or concomitant therapy for eradication of Helicobacter pylori infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 30:1338–1345. https://doi.org/10.1111/jgh.12984
Gatta L, Vakil N, Vaira D, Scarpignato C (2013) Global eradication rates for Helicobacter pylori infection: systematic review and meta-analysis of sequential therapy. BMJ 347:f4587
Malfertheiner P, Megraud F, O’Morain CA, Gisbert JP, Kuipers EJ, Axon AT, Bazzoli F et al (2017) Management of Helicobacter pylori infection—the Maastricht V/Florence Consensus Report. Gut 66:6–30. https://doi.org/10.1136/gutjnl-2016-312288
Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG (2009) Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med 6:e1000097. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097
Greenberg ER, Anderson GL, Morgan DR, Torres J, Chey WD, Bravo LE, Dominguez RL et al (2011) 14-day triple, 5-day concomitant, and 10-day sequential therapies for Helicobacter pylori infection in seven Latin American sites: a randomised trial. Lancet 378:507–514
Federico A, Nardone G, Gravina AG, Iovene MR, Miranda A, Compare D, Pilloni PA et al (2012) Efficacy of 5-day levofloxacin-containing concomitant therapy in eradication of Helicobacter pylori infection. Gastroenterology 143:55–61
Zullo A, Scaccianoce G, De Francesco V, Ruggiero V, D’Ambrosio P, Castorani L, Bonfrate L et al (2013) Concomitant, sequential, and hybrid therapy for H. pylori eradication: a pilot study. Clin Res Hepatol Gas 37:647–650
De Francesco V, Hassan C, Ridola L, Giorgio F, Ierardi E, Zullo A (2014) Sequential, concomitant and hybrid first-line therapies for Helicobacter pylori eradication: a prospective randomized study. J Med Microbiol 63:748–752
Hsu PI, Wu DC, Chen WC, Tseng HH, Yu HC, Wang HM, Kao SS et al (2014) Randomized controlled trial comparing 7-day triple, 10-day sequential, and 7-day concomitant therapies for Helicobacter pylori infection. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 58:5936–5942. https://doi.org/10.1128/aac.02922-14
Lee HJ, Kim JI, Lee JS, Jun EJ, Oh JH, Cheung DY, Chung WC et al (2015) Concomitant therapy achieved the best eradication rate for Helicobacter pylori among various treatment strategies. World J Gastroenterol 21:351–359. https://doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v21.i1.351
Tepes B, Vujasinovic M, Seruga M, Stefanovic M, Forte A, Jeverica S (2016) Randomized clinical trial comparing 10-day sequential, 7-day concomitant and 7-day standard triple therapies for Helicobacter pylori eradication. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol 28:676–683. https://doi.org/10.1097/MEG.0000000000000590
Wu D, Hsu P, Wu J, Opekun AR, Kuo C, Wu I, Wang SSW et al (2010) Sequential and concomitant therapy with four drugs is equally effective for eradication of H pylori infection. Clin Gastroenterol H 8:36–41
Huang YK, Wu MC, Wang SS, Kuo CH, Lee YC, Chang LL, Wang TH et al (2012) Lansoprazole-based sequential and concomitant therapy for the first-line Helicobacter pylori eradication. J Dig Dis 13:232–238. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-2980.2012.00575.x
McNicholl AG, Marin AC, Molina-Infante J, Castro M, Barrio J, Ducons J, Calvet X et al (2014) Randomised clinical trial comparing sequential and concomitant therapies for Helicobacter pylori eradication in routine clinical practice. Gut 63:244–249
Ang TL, Fock KM, Song M, Ang D, Kwek AB, Ong J, Tan J et al (2015) Ten-day triple therapy versus sequential therapy versus concomitant therapy as first line treatment for Helicobacter pylori infection. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 30:1134–1139. https://doi.org/10.1111/jgh.12892
Gungor G, Baglicakoglu M, Kayacetin E, Biyik M, Ucar R, Goktepe H, Ataseven H et al (2015) Current status of five different regimens for empiric first-line Helicobacter pylori eradication in Turkey. Digestion 92:55–59. https://doi.org/10.1159/000434627
Apostolopoulos P, Koumoutsos I, Ekmektzoglou K, Dogantzis P, Vlachou E, Kalantzis C, Tsibouris P et al (2016) Concomitant versus sequential therapy for the treatment of Helicobacter pylori infection: a Greek randomized prospective study. Scand J Gastroenterol 51:145–151. https://doi.org/10.3109/00365521.2015.1079646
Basyigit S, Sapmaz F, Kefeli A, Yeniova AO, Asilturk Z, Hokkaömeroğlu M, Uzman M et al (2016) Increasing antibiotic resistance is the main cause for the failure of helicobacter pylori eradication: comparison of three trusted treatment protocols. Acta Medica Mediterr 32:297–302. 10.19193/0393-6384_2016_2_44
Chung JW, Han JP, Kim KO, Kim SY, Hong SJ, Kim TH, Kim CW et al (2016) Ten-day empirical sequential or concomitant therapy is more effective than triple therapy for Helicobacter pylori eradication: a multicenter, prospective study. Dig Liver Dis 48:888–892. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dld.2016.05.005
Das R, Sureshkumar S, Sreenath GS, Kate V (2016) Sequential versus concomitant therapy for eradication of Helicobacter Pylori in patients with perforated duodenal ulcer: a randomized trial. Saudi J Gastroenterol 22:309–315. https://doi.org/10.4103/1319-3767.187605
Georgopoulos SD, Xirouchakis E, Martinez-Gonzales B, Zampeli E, Grivas E, Spiliadi C, Sotiropoulou M et al (2016) Randomized clinical trial comparing ten day concomitant and sequential therapies for Helicobacter pylori eradication in a high clarithromycin resistance area. Eur J Intern Med 32:84–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejim.2016.04.011
Kefeli A, Basyigit S, Yeniova AO, Kefeli TT, Aslan M, Tanas O (2016) Comparison of three different regimens against Helicobacter pylori as a first-line treatment: a randomized clinical trial. Bosn J Basic Med Sci 16:52–57. 10.17305/bjbms.2016.660
Park SM, Kim JS, Kim BW, Ji JS, Choi H (2016) A randomised clinical trial comparing 10- or 14-day sequential therapy and 10- or 14-day concomitant therapy for the first line empirical treatment of Helicobacter pylori infection. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 32:589–594. https://doi.org/10.1111/jgh.13510
Lim JH, Lee DH, Choi C, Lee ST, Kim N, Jeong SH, Kim JW et al (2013) Clinical outcomes of two-week sequential and concomitant therapies for Helicobacter pylori eradication: a randomized pilot study. Helicobacter 18:180–186
Higgins J, Sally (2008) Chapter 8: assessing risk of bias in included studies. In: Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. ed. John Wiley & Sons, pp187–241
Morgan DR, Torres J, Sexton R, Herrero R, Salazar-Martinez E, Greenberg ER, Bravo LE et al (2013) Risk of recurrent Helicobacter pylori infection 1 year after initial eradication therapy in 7 Latin American communities. JAMA 309:578–586. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2013.311
Ang TL, Fock KM, Ang D (2013) A randomized controlled trial of triple therapy versus sequential therapy versus concomitant therapy as first line treatment for H. pylori infection. Gastroenterology 144:S53
Yasser FAS, Haneen Y (2013) Treatment of Helicobacter pylori, comparison of three regimens, a double blind randomized trial. J Gastroenterol Hepatol (Hong Kong) 2:699–702
Jung SM, Cheung DY, Kim JI, Kim I, Seong H (2016) Comparing the efficacy of concomitant therapy with sequential therapy as the first-line therapy of Helicobacter pylori eradication. Gastroenterol Res Pract 2016:1293649. https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/1293649
Kim SY, Park DK, Kwon KA, Kim KO, Kim YJ, Chung J (2014) Ten day concomitant therapy is superior to ten day sequential therapy for Helicobacter pylori eradication. Korean J Gastroenterol 64:260–267
Ang TL, Fock KM, Song M, Ang D, Kwek ABE, Ong J, Tan J et al (2015) Ten-day triple therapy versus sequential therapy versus concomitant therapy as first-line treatment for Helicobacter pylori infection. J Gastroen Hepatol 30:1134–1139. https://doi.org/10.1111/jgh.12892
Malfertheiner P, Megraud F, O’Morain CA, Atherton J, Axon AT, Bazzoli F, Gensini GF et al (2012) Management of Helicobacter pylori infection—the Maastricht IV/ Florence Consensus Report. Gut 61:646–664. https://doi.org/10.1136/gutjnl-2012-302084
Kuo CH, Kuo FC, Hu HM, Liu CJ, Wang SS, Chen YH, Hsieh MC et al (2012) The optimal first-line therapy of Helicobacter pylori infection in year 2012. Gastroenterol Res Pract 2012:168361. https://doi.org/10.1155/2012/168361
Zullo A, De Francesco V, Hassan C (2010) Sequential or concomitant therapy for Helicobacter pylori eradication? J Clin Gastroenterol 44(658):658–659. https://doi.org/10.1097/MCG.0b013e3181d6b543
Yeo YH, Shiu SI, Ho HJ, Zou B, Lin JT, Wu MS, Liou JM et al (2016) First-line Helicobacter pylori eradication therapies in countries with high and low clarithromycin resistance: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. Gut:1–8. doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/gutjnl-2016-311868
Hersoug LG, Moller P, Loft S (2016) Gut microbiota-derived lipopolysaccharide uptake and trafficking to adipose tissue: implications for inflammation and obesity. Obes Rev 17:297–312. https://doi.org/10.1111/obr.12370
Molina-Infante J, Romano M, Fernandez-Bermejo M, Federico A, Gravina AG, Pozzati L, Garcia-Abadia E et al (2013) Optimized nonbismuth quadruple therapies cure most patients with Helicobacter pylori infection in populations with high rates of antibiotic resistance. Gastroenterology 145:121–128. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.gastro.2013.03.050
Funding
This work was supported by the National Key Research and Development Program of China (no. 2016YFC1302201), the National Natural Science Foundation of China (81460115), the Science and Technology Projects of Jiangxi province (2014BBG70019), and Special funds of the graduate student innovation project in Jiangxi province in 2014 (no: YC2014-S081).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
Yong Xie designed the concept. Youhua Wang and Rulin Zhao acquired the data. Youhua Wang and Rulin Zhao performed the analysis and interpretation of the data. You-hua Wang drafted the manuscript. Ben Wang, Qiaoyun Zhao, Zhen Li, Liya Zhu-ge, and Wenzhu Yin provided a critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content. Youhua Wang and Ben Wang performed the statistical analysis, and Yong Xie provided study supervision.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
All authors approved the final version of the manuscript and declare no conflict of interest. This study was not funded by the pharmaceutical industry.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Wang, Y., Zhao, R., Wang, B. et al. Sequential versus concomitant therapy for treatment of Helicobacter pylori infection: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 74, 1–13 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00228-017-2347-7
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00228-017-2347-7