Skip to main content

Table 1 Characteristics of systematic reviews comparing triple therapy with different PPIs (n = 7)

From: Pharmacological regimens for eradication of Helicobacter pylori: an overview of systematic reviews and network meta-analysis

Author, year, country Last search date Disease Interventionc Comparatorc No. of studies in MA No. of patients in MA Eradication rates Eradication rates odds ratio (95 % CI) by ITT Quality assessmentb
Gisbert et al. 2003-r Spain [43] Sep 2002 HP infection; PUD/NUD/not reported Rabeprazole Omeprazole/Lansoprazole 12 2226 79 % vs. 77 % 1.15 (0.93–1.42) +
Rabeprazole Omeprazole 9 1475 77 % vs. 77 % 1.03 (0.81–1.32)
Rabeprazole Lansoprazole 7 1095 82 % vs. 79 % 1.20 (0.87–1.64)
Vergara et al. 2003 Spain [51] Sep 2002 HP infection Omeprazole Lansoprazole 4 1085 74.7 % vs. 76 %; 0.91 (0.69–1.21)a +
Omeprazole Rabeprazole 4 825 77.9 % vs. 81.2 % 0.81 (0.58–1.15)a
Omeprazole Esomeprazole 2 833 87.7 % vs. 89 % 0.89 (0.58–1.35)a
Lansoprazole Rabeprazole 3 550 81 % vs. 85.7 % 0.77 (0.48–1.22)a
Gisbert et al. 2004 Spain [44] Jun 2003 HP infection; PUD +/−NUD Esomeprazole Omeprazole 4 1292 85 % vs. 82 % 1.19 (0.81–1.74) +
Gisbert et al. 2004 Spain [45] Sep 2002 HP infection; PUD +/−NUD Pantoprazole Omeprazole/Lansoprazole 7 1137 83 % vs. 81 % 1.00 (0.61–1.64) +
Pantoprazole Omeprazole 1 974 83 % vs. 82 % 0.91 (0.49–1.69)
Pantoprazole Lansoprazole 2 258 78 % vs. 75 % 1.22 (0.68–2.17)
Wang et al. 2006 China [24] Jul 2006 HP infection; DU, NUD, PUD Esomeprazole Omeprazole 11 2048 85.6 % vs. 81.6 % 1.30 (1.02–1.65) 0
Wang X et al. 2006 China [46] 2000–2005 (published date) HP infection; PUD/NUD Esomeprazole Omeprazole/Pantoprazole 11 2146 86 % vs. 81 % 1.39 (1.09–1.75) 0
Esomeprazole Omeprazole 10 1946 85 % vs. 82 % 1.29 (1.01–1.65)
Esomeprazole Pantoprazole 1 200 94 % vs. 82 % 3.44 (1.30–9.07)
McNicholl et al. 2012 Spain [42] Oct 2011 HP infection; naïve to therapy Rabeprazole Omeprazole/Lansoprazole/pantoprazole 21 2945 80.5 % vs. 76.2 % 1.21 (1.02–1.42) 0
Esomeprazole Omeprazole/Lansoprazole/pantoprazole 12 2598 82.3 % vs. 77.6 % 1.32 (1.01–1.73)
Rabeprazole Esomeprazole 5 1574 76.7 % vs. 78.7 % 0.90 (0.70–1.17)
  1. HP H.pylori, PPI proton pump inhibitor, PUD peptic ulcer disease, NUD non-ulcer dyspepsia, MA meta-analysis, ITT intention to treat, CI confidence interval
  2. a Peto OR is reported here
  3. b Quality assessment: high quality (++): majority of criteria met, little or no risk of bias and results unlikely to be changed by further research. Acceptable (+): most criteria met, some flaws in the study with an associated risk of bias and conclusions may change in the light of further studies. Low quality (0): either most criteria not met or significant flaws relating to key aspects of study design, and conclusions likely to change in the light of further studies
  4. c The antibiotics are the same type and same dose for each arm of the RCTs
Back to article page

BMC Gastroenterology

ISSN: 1471-230X

Contact us

\