ReviewAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland)2024
Newer Therapies for Refractory
Review in Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Effectiveness of Lactobacillus-supplemented eradication therapy for Helicobacter pylori: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2026Pooled it
- Gastric Microbiota Dysbiosis and Microbiome-Based Interventions in Chronic Atrophic Gastritis.Nutrients · 2026Review
- Exploring the High-Risk Factors of Gastric "Inflammatory Cancer Transformation" Based on Inflammatory Immune Response: Construction of RHPI Complicated With CAG Risk Prediction Model.Cancer medicine · 2026Article
- Antimicrobial Resistance Patterns and Predictors inMicroorganisms · 2026Article
- Efficacy of a reduced-drug burden quadruple therapy with vonoprazan, cefuroxime, minocycline, and bismuth forFrontiers in medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
background
objectivesThis review aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of newer treatment regimens in patients who have failed initial
methodsA comprehensive literature search was conducted in PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Embase. Inclusion criteria were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published after 2010, involving patients with previous
results10 RCTs were included. HDDT demonstrated high eradication rates (81.3% to 89.2%), particularly when combined with metronidazole (92.6%), although at an increased frequency of adverse events. Vonoprazan-based regimens achieved comparable or higher eradication rates (83.3% to 89.5%) compared to PPI-based therapies, with similar adverse events. Rifabutin-containing triple therapy showed high efficacy (80.7% to 100%), particularly in patients with a history of multiple treatment failures, and it was associated with lower adverse events compared to bismuth-containing regimens.
conclusionsHDDT, vonoprazan-based therapy, and rifabutin-based therapy have proven to be effective and safe rescue regimens for treating
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.