Empirical Helicobacter pylori "rescue" therapy after failure of two eradication treatments

Empirical vs. Susceptibility-Guided Treatment of Helicobacter pylori Infection: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background

Treating Helicobacter pylori infection according to antibiotic resistance has been frequently recommended. However, information on its real effectiveness is scarce.

Aim

The aim of this study is to perform a meta-analysis comparing empirical vs. susceptibility-guided treatment of H. pylori.

Methods

Selection of studies: Studies comparing empirical versus susceptibility-guided treatment were selected. Search strategy: electronic and manual up to August 2021. Data synthesis: by intention-to-treat (random-effects model).

Results

Overall, 54 studies were included (6,705 patients in the susceptibility-guided group and 7,895 in the empirical group). H. pylori eradication rate was 86 vs. 76%, respectively (RR: 1.12; 95% CI: 1.08-1.17; I 2: 83%). Similar results were found when only RCTs were evaluated (24 studies; RR: 1.16; 95% CI: 1.11-1.22; I 2: 71%) and when susceptibility testing was assessed by culture (RR: 1.12; 95% CI: 1.06-1.18) or PCR (RR: 1.14; 95% CI: 1.05-1.23). For first-line treatments (naïve patients; 30 studies), better efficacy results were obtained with the susceptibility-guided strategy (RR: 1.15; 95% CI: 1.11-1.20; I 2: 79%). However, for empirical first-line quadruple regimens, in particular (both with and without bismuth, excluding the suboptimal triple therapies), not based on CYP2C19 gene polymorphism, no differences in efficacy were found compared with the susceptibility-guided group (RR: 1.04; 95% CI: 0.99-1.09); this lack of difference was confirmed in RCTs (RR: 1.05; 95% CI: 0.99-1.12). For rescue therapies (13 studies, most 2nd-line), similar results were demonstrated for both strategies, including all studies (RR: 1.09; 95% CI: 0.97-1.22; I 2: 82%) and when only RCTs were considered (RR: 1.15; 95% CI: 0.97-1.36).

Conclusion

The benefit of susceptibility-guided treatment over empirical treatment of H. pylori infection could not be demonstrated, either in first-line (if the most updated quadruple regimens are prescribed) or in rescue therapies.

Evaluating treatments with rifabutin and amoxicillin for eradication of Helicobacter pylori infection in adults: a systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Helicobacter pylori causes dyspepsia, peptic ulcer, and gastric malignancies. Treatments for Helicobacter pylori are mostly empirical depending on regional antibiotic resistances and the patient's history and less frequently susceptibility guided. Helicobacter pylori has a low resistance to rifabutin and has been proposed as an alternative for third-line treatment and beyond but recently has also gained attention for use as first- and second-line treatment.

AREAS COVERED

In this review, the authors systematically searched medical databases in order to present the current eradication rates for any treatment based on the two antibiotics, rifabutin and amoxicillin with a potent acid inhibitor. They also assessed the safety and tolerance of all the relative regimens.

EXPERT OPINION

Treatment with a rifabutin- and amoxicillin-containing regimen is a valuable option when treating difficult to eradicate Helicobacter pylori infections. Its efficacy is overall 71.4%, and it is not influenced by previous antibiotics, gender, smoking habits, and age. Its results were better when used as a first- or second-line treatment. In third-line therapy and beyond, eradication rates are lower. Adverse effects of all rifabutin regimens occurred in 23% of patients and were mostly mild with bone marrow suppression being very low and reversible.

Rifabutin triple therapy for first-line and rescue treatment of Helicobacter pylori infection: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Due to the increasing resistance of Helicobacter pylori, there is a need for novel antibiotic treatment protocols. We aimed to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis in order to determine the effectiveness and safety of rifabutin triple therapy for H. pylori infection.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review of prospective clinical trials with a treatment arm consisting of proton pump inhibitor, amoxicillin, and rifabutin and a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

RESULTS

Thirty-three prospective studies including 44 datasets were identified. Meta-analysis of four RCTs for rescue treatment found no difference between treatment groups (odds ratio [OR] 0.88, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.437-1.791, I²  = 68.1%, P = 0.733). Only one RCT compared rifabutin therapy with control for first-line treatment of H. pylori infection (OR 3.78, 95% CI 2.44-5.87, P < 0.0001). Treatment was more likely to be successful in Asian versus non-Asian populations (81.0% vs 72.4%, P = 0.001) and when daily amoxicillin dose was ≥ 3000 mg or proton pump inhibitor dose was ≥ 80 mg or treatment duration was 14 days (80.6% vs 66.0%, P = 0.0001). The overall event rate for adverse effects was 24.8% (729/2937) (95% CI 0.23-0.26), and the pooled OR for adverse effects in the treatment versus control group was 0.93 (95% CI 0.50-1.75) (I²  = 79.76, P = 0.82).

CONCLUSION

Evidence for the effectiveness of rifabutin for the first-line treatment of H. pylori infection in adults is limited, and studies comparing rifabutin with conventional first-line treatments are lacking.

Rifabutin for the Treatment of Helicobacter Pylori Infection: A Review

Nowadays, apart from having to know first-line Helicobacter pylori eradication regimens well, we must also be prepared to face treatment failures. The aim of this review is to summarize the role of rifabutin in the management of H. pylori infection. Bibliographical searches were performed in PubMed. Data on resistance and efficacy of rifabutin-containing regimens on H. pylori eradication were meta-analyzed. Mean H. pylori rifabutin resistance rate (39 studies, including 9721 patients) was 0.13%; when studies only including patients naïve to H. pylori eradication treatment were considered, this figure was even lower (0.07%). Mean H. pylori eradication rate (by intention-to-treat) with rifabutin-containing regimens (3052 patients) was 73%. Respective cure rates for second-, third-, fourth- and fifth-line therapies, were 79%, 69%, 69% and 72%. Most studies administered rifabutin 300 mg/day, which seemed to be more effective than 150 mg/day. The ideal length of treatment remains unclear, but 10–12-day regimens are generally recommended. Adverse events to rifabutin treatment in H. pylori studies were relatively infrequent (15%), and severe adverse events were exceptional (myelotoxicity was the most significant, although always reversible). In summary, rifabutin-containing therapy represents an encouraging strategy generally restricted, at present, to patients where previous (usually multiple) eradication regimens have failed.

Empirical or susceptibility-guided treatment for Helicobacter pylori infection? A comprehensive review

Although susceptibility-guided therapy is frequently recommended for Helicobacter pylori infection, the evidence available to date supporting this strategy is limited. The aim of the present article is to review the advantages and limitations of the susceptibility-guided and the empirical strategies to treat this infection. We performed a bibliographic search to identify studies investigating H. pylori susceptibility-guided therapy. Culture is not the only way to assess antibiotic resistance, as different polymerase chain reaction-based approaches have been developed as alternative methods. For detecting H. pylori antimicrobial resistance, a molecular approach based on a stool sample might enable more convenient, time-saving methods. Unfortunately, the antimicrobial susceptibility cannot be obtained in all cases. Furthermore, antibiotic susceptibility testing in clinical practice yields useful information only for a few antibiotics: clarithromycin, metronidazole, and quinolones. In addition, susceptibility towards clarithromycin and metronidazole in vitro does not necessarily lead to eradication in vivo. In the case of H. pylori therapy failure, we should not re-administer any of the antibiotics against which H. pylori has probably become resistant. Our updated meta-analysis showed that susceptibility-guided treatment is not better than empirical treatment of H. pylori infection in first-line therapy if the most updated quadruple regimens are empirically prescribed, and similar efficacy results were also demonstrated with the two strategies for second-line therapy. Cumulative H. pylori eradication rate with several successive rescue therapies empirically prescribed reaches almost 100%. Finally, the studies that have evaluated the cost-effectiveness of the susceptibility-guided treatment have achieved contradictory results. In summary, we can conclude that the evidence is too limited to support the generalized use of susceptibility-guided therapy for H. pylori treatment in routine clinical practice, either as first-line or as rescue treatment. Nevertheless, it would be recommended that susceptibility tests are performed routinely, even before prescribing first-line treatment, in specialized centers with an interest in H. pylori management.

Rescue Therapy with a Proton Pump Inhibitor Plus Amoxicillin and Rifabutin for Helicobacter pylori Infection: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background. To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical trials for eradication of Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) that included a treatment arm with a proton pump inhibitor, rifabutin, and amoxicillin. Materials and Methods. We selected clinical trials that examined the efficacy of H. pylori eradication therapies and included a study arm using the test regimen from major medical literature databases and abstracts from major gastroenterology meetings. We also did subgroup and sensitivity analyses. Results. Twenty-one studies were included in systematic review. The total eradication rates of the test regimen were 70.4% by intent-to-treat (ITT) and 72.0% by per-protocol (PP) analyses. The pooled odds ratio (OR) was 0.55 using fixed effects model (P = 0.283) for the test regimen versus other triple regimens. The total eradication rates were 68.4% for the test regimen and 81.9% in the control group by ITT, while the OR was 1.08 using random effects model (P = 0.019). The pooled eradication rate was 66.4% for the test regimen and 67.4% for the control group by ITT. The total adverse effects incidence were 25.1% for the test regimen. Conclusions. The test regimen for H. pylori rescue therapy may be not superior to control regimens in efficacy.

Helicobacter pylori infection: sequential therapy followed by levofloxacin-containing triple therapy provides a good cumulative eradication rate

BACKGROUND

In the eradication of H. pylori infection, even today, the main international guidelines recommend the triple therapy as first-line regimen, although its effectiveness is clearly decreasing. As second-line treatment, the bismuth-containing quadruple therapy is the most used regimen, although several other therapies are studied. The Italian guidelines recommend, alternatively, sequential therapy or triple therapy as first-line treatment and levofloxacin-containing triple therapy as second-line regimen. We wanted to assess the overall eradication rate of Helicobacter pylori infection in two therapeutic rounds following the Italian guidelines in clinical practice.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We treated 231 consecutive Helicobacter pylori-positive patients by sequential therapy and we verified the eradication 8-10 weeks after treatment by stool antigen test. Patients positive for stool antigen test received levofloxacin-containing triple therapy, as second-line therapy, according to Italian Guidelines and they were again submitted to the fecal test 8-10 weeks after the end of treatment.

RESULTS

In the first-line regimen, we obtained an eradication rate of 92.6%, in the second-line of 75.0% and as cumulative result we achieved a 97.8% of eradication, in per-protocol analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Sequential therapy as first-line and levofloxacin-containing triple therapy as second-line represent a good combination to eradicate Helicobacter pylori infection in only two rounds.

Review article: rifabutin in the treatment of refractory Helicobacter pylori infection

BACKGROUND

Even with the current most effective treatment regimens, a relevant proportion of patients will fail to eradicate Helicobacter pylori infection.

AIM

To evaluate the role of rifabutin in the treatment of H. pylori infection.

METHODS

Bibliographical searches were performed in MEDLINE. Data on the efficacy of rifabutin-containing regimens on H. pylori eradication were combined and meta-analysed using the generic inverse variance method.

RESULTS

Rifabutin shows good in vitro activity against H. pylori. Mean H. pylori rifabutin resistance rate (calculated from 11 studies including 2982 patients) was 1.3% (95% confidence interval = 0.9-1.7%). When only studies including patients naïve to H. pylori eradication treatment were considered, this figure was even lower (0.6%). On the other hand, higher values of rifabutin resistance were calculated (1.59%) when only post-treatment patients were considered. Overall, mean H. pylori eradication rate (intention-to-treat analysis) with rifabutin-containing regimens (1008 patients) was 73% (67-79%). Respective cure rates for second-line (223 patients), third-line (342 patients) and fourth/fifth-line (95 patients) rifabutin therapies were 79% (67-92%), 66% (55-77%) and 70% (60-79%) respectively. For treating H. pylori infection, almost all studies have administered rifabutin 300 mg/day; this dose seems to be more effective than 150 mg/day. The ideal length of treatment remains unclear, but 10- to 12-day regimens are generally recommended. The mean rate of adverse effects was 22% (19-25%). Myelotoxicity is the most significant, although this complication was rare. Until now, all patients have recovered of leucopenia uneventfully in a few days, and there have been no reports of infection or other adverse outcomes related to it.

CONCLUSION

Rifabutin-containing rescue therapy constitutes an encouraging strategy after multiple (usually three) previous eradication failures with key antibiotics such as amoxicillin, clarithromycin, metronidazole, tetracycline and levofloxacin.

Effectiveness and safety of repeated quadruple therapy in Helicobacter pylori infection after failure of second-line quadruple therapy: repeated quadruple therapy as a third-line therapy

BACKGROUNDS

Quadruple therapy using a proton-pump inhibitor, bismuth, metronidazole, and tetracycline is a standard second-line therapy for Helicobacter pylori infection, achieving an eradication rate of about 80% in Korea. A standard third-line therapy is not currently established, although various protocols have been proposed. We performed this study to evaluate the effectiveness of a retrial with quadruple therapy before starting a third-line treatment with new drugs.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In 80 of 746 patients treated with a second-line quadruple therapy at the Korea University Ansan Hospital between January 2002 and September 2010, treatment for H. pylori had failed, and 45 of these patients were eligible for this study. Eradication of H. pylori was assessed by repeated endoscopy or by the (13) C-urea breath test at least 4 weeks after therapy. The patients with treatment failure were treated again with quadruple regimen for 2 weeks and reevaluated for treatment effectiveness and safety.

RESULTS

The eradication rate with second-line quadruple therapy was 86.9%. Of the 80 patients who failed treatment for H. pylori with the initial second-line quadruple therapy, 64 patients were treated again with the same regimen. Of the 45 retreated patients in this study, three patients were lost to follow-up and two complied poorly with medication. The eradication rate in the 40 patients retreated was 75.0% at per-protocol analysis. Seventeen patients experienced mild adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

A retrial of quadruple therapy before use of a third-line therapy may be safe and effective for patients who fail to respond to second-line quadruple therapy.

Second-line rescue therapy of helicobacter pylori infection

Helicobacter pylori infection is the main known cause of gastritis, gastroduodenal ulcer disease and gastric cancer. After more than 20 years of experience in H. pylori treatment, however, the ideal regimen to treat this infection has still to be found. Nowadays, apart from having to know well first-line eradication regimens, we must also be prepared to face treatment failures. Therefore, in designing a treatment strategy we should not focus on the results of primary therapy alone, but also on the final (overall) eradication rate. The choice of a 'rescue' treatment depends on which treatment is used initially. If a first-line clarithromycin-based regimen was used, a second-line metronidazole-based treatment (quadruple therapy) may be used afterwards, and then a levofloxacin-based combination would be a third-line 'rescue' option. Alternatively, it has recently been suggested that levofloxacin-based 'rescue' therapy constitutes an encouraging second-line strategy, representing an alternative to quadruple therapy in patients with previous PPI-clarithromycin-amoxicillin failure, with the advantage of efficacy, simplicity and safety. In this case, quadruple regimen may be reserved as a third-line 'rescue' option. Finally, rifabutin-based 'rescue' therapy constitutes an encouraging empirical fourth-line strategy after multiple previous eradication failures with key antibiotics such as amoxicillin, clarithromycin, metronidazole, tetracycline, and levofloxacin. Even after two consecutive failures, several studies have demonstrated that H. pylori eradication can finally be achieved in almost all patients if several 'rescue' therapies are consecutively given. Therefore, the attitude in H. pylori eradication therapy failure, even after two or more unsuccessful attempts, should be to fight and not to surrender.

“Rescue” regimens after Helicobacter pylori treatment failure

Helicobacter pylori (H pylori) infection is the main cause of gastritis, gastroduodenal ulcer disease, and gastric cancer. After more than 20 years of experience in H pylori treatment, in my opinion, the ideal regimen to treat this infection is still to be found. Currently, apart from having to know first-line eradication regimens well, we must also be prepared to face treatment failures. Therefore, in designing a treatment strategy we should not focus on the results of primary therapy alone, but also on the final (overall) eradication rate. The choice of a “rescue” treatment depends on which treatment is used initially. If a clarithromycin-based regimen was used initially, a subsequent metronidazole-based treatment (quadruple therapy) may be used afterwards, and then a levofloxacin-based combination would be a third “rescue” option. Alternatively, it has recently been suggested that levofloxacin-based rescue therapy constitutes an encouraging second-line strategy, representing an alternative to quadruple therapy in patients with previous PPI-clarithromycin-amoxicillin failure, with the advantage of efficacy, simplicity and safety. In this case, a quadruple regimen may be reserved as a third-line rescue option. Finally, rifabutin-based rescue therapy constitutes an encouraging empirical fourth-line strategy after multiple previous eradication failures with key antibiotics such as amoxicillin, clarithromycin, metronidazole, tetracycline, and levofloxacin. Even after two consecutive failures, several studies have demonstrated that H pylori eradication can finally be achieved in almost all patients if several rescue therapies are consecutively given. Therefore, the attitude in H pylori eradication therapy failure, even after two or more unsuccessful attempts, should be to fight and not to surrender.

The effectiveness of rifabutin triple therapy for patients with difficult-to-eradicate Helicobacter pylori in clinical practice

BACKGROUND

Failure of first line and subsequent Helicobacter pylori eradication therapy is a significant problem and alternative treatments are few.

AIMS

To evaluate the efficacy of a rifabutin-based triple therapy in clinical practice and determine the optimal strategy for its use.

METHODS

Patients referred after first or subsequent treatment failure were prescribed rifabutin triple therapy consisting of standard dose proton pump inhibitor, amoxicillin 1 g and rifabutin 150 mg each b.d. for 10 days.

RESULTS

In 67 patients, the main indications for treatment were dyspepsia (55%), peptic ulcer disease (24%) and increased gastric cancer risk (18%). The median number of previous treatments was 2 (range: 1-9). Eradication of Helicobacter pylori was achieved in 76% (48/63) per protocol and 72% (48/67) on an intention-to-treat basis. When used as second line therapy, 95% (18/19) achieved eradication compared with 68% (30/44) when two or more previous treatments had been used (P = 0.03). Outcome was independent of age, ethnicity, gender or indication for treatment. Adverse events were reported in 10%.

CONCLUSION

Rifabutin triple therapy is a well tolerated and effective second line therapy in the treatment of persistent Helicobacter pylori; however, its efficacy decreases with increasing number of failed previous therapies.

Treatment and dosing of Helicobacter pylori infection: when pharmacology meets clinic

Helicobacter pylori infection is a major cause of diseases located in the upper gastrointestinal tract. Successful eradication of the bacteria may improve H. pylori-related symptomatic complaints in functional dyspepsia, cure peptic ulcer disease and prevent gastric cancer. As vaccines are not available, the search for the optimal drug regimen has dominated the last decade. Today, most countries prefer a 7- to 10-day regimen containing a proton pump inhibitor, clarithromycin and amoxicillin as first-line treatment. An alternative (or second-line) treatment contains a proton pump inhibitor, bismuth, tetracycline and metronidazole. This review also highlights the impact of new drugs, new drug combinations, and their optimal dosing required to maximise clinical outcome.

Efficacy of rifabutin-based triple therapy in Helicobacter pylori infected patients after two standard treatments

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Even with the current most effective treatment regimens for Helicobacter pylori infection, a considerable number of patients will be resistant to eradication. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the H. pylori eradication rate in patients resistant to standard therapies when treated with a triple therapy of pantoprazole, rifabutin and amoxicillin.

METHODS

Ninety-two consecutive patients diagnosed with H. pylori infection resistant to two previous treatment regimens were treated with pantoprazole, rifabutin and amoxicillin for 10 days. The persistence or eradication of H. pylori was determined by a 13C-urea breath test performed 4 weeks after the treatment.

RESULTS

Per protocol eradication was achieved in 62.2% of patients and the intention-to-treat eradication was 60.8%. Only two patients were excluded for adverse events related to the treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

The eradication rate is acceptable as a third-line therapy, particularly in centers with high cure rate for first line therapy. Another important value of this study is the good tolerance for the treatment observed in our patients. It is possible that rifabutin-based triple therapy may be of use in hospital centers that do not have disposable culture and susceptibility methods against H. pylori.

Randomized trial of rifabutin-based triple therapy and high-dose dual therapy for rescue treatment of Helicobacter pylori resistant to both metronidazole and clarithromycin

BACKGROUND

The clinical management of Helicobacter pylori infected patients who failed standard eradication therapies remains a challenge.

AIM

To investigate the efficacy of rifabutin-based triple therapy and high-dose dual therapy for rescue treatment of H. pylori, and the correlation between cytochrome P450 2C19 (CYP2C19) polymorphisms and treatment outcome.

METHODS

Patients infected with H. pylori resistant to both metronidazole and clarithromycin (n = 145) were randomized to either esomeprazole 20 mg, rifabutin 150 mg and amoxicillin 1 g, each given b.d. for 7 days (ERA), or to omeprazole 40 mg and amoxicillin 1000 mg, each given t.d.s. for 14 days (OA). Crossover therapy was offered in cases of persistent infection. CYP2C19 polymorphisms were determined by polymerase chain reaction restriction fragment length polymorphism.

RESULTS

Intention-to-treat and per-protocol eradication rates were: ERA 74% (62.4-83.6) and 78% (66.7-87.3); high-dose OA 70% (57.5-79.7) and 75% (62.5-84.5). Crossover therapy was successful in seven of 10 patients with ERA and in eight of 10 patients with OA. Premature discontinuation of treatment occurred in 2% and 5% of patients, respectively. There was only a non-significant trend to lower eradication rates in homozygous extensive metabolizers.

CONCLUSIONS

Triple therapy with esomeprazole, rifabutin and amoxicillin and high-dose omeprazole/amoxicillin are comparable and effective and safe for rescue therapy of H. pylori regardless of the patient's CYP2C19 genotype.

Helicobacter pylori "rescue" therapy after failure of two eradication treatments

Nowadays, apart from having to know well first-line eradication regimens, we must also be prepared to face Helicobacter pylori treatment failures. Therefore, in designing a treatment strategy we should not focus on the results of primary therapy alone, but also on the final--overall--eradication rate. After failure of a combination of proton pump inhibitor (PPI), amoxicillin, and clarithromycin, the use of empirical quadruple therapy (PPI-bismuth-tetracycline-metronidazole), has been generally used as the optimal second-line therapy. Even after two consecutive failures, several studies have demonstrated that H. pylori eradication can finally be achieved in almost all patients if several "rescue" therapies are consecutively given. It seems that performing culture even after a second eradication failure may not be necessary, as it is possible to construct an overall strategy to maximize H. pylori eradication, based on the different possibilities of empirical treatment (when antibiotic susceptibilities are unknown). Thus, if one does not want to perform culture before the administration of the third treatment after failure of the first two, different empirical treatments exist, including regimens based on: 1, amoxicillin (amoxicillin-PPI at high doses); 2, amoxicillin plus tetracycline (PPI-bismuth-tetracycline-amoxicillin, or ranitidine-bismuth-citrate-tetracyline-amoxicillin); 3, rifabutin (rifabutin-amoxicillin-PPI); 4, levofloxacin (levofloxacin-amoxicillin-PPI); and 5, furazolidone (furazolidone-bismuth-tetracycline-PPI).

Rifabutin based triple therapy for eradication of H. pylori primary and secondary resistant to tinidazole and clarithromycin

BACKGROUND

Rifabutin has been empirically used in Helicobacter pylori infections resistant to triple therapy. There are no data on primary and secondary resistance to rifabutin and its use in specific cases.

AIM

To analyse the susceptibility and resistance to rifabutin in H. pylori-positive patients with or without previous H. pylori therapy and to test the efficacy of rifabutin in H. pylori resistant to clarithromycin and tinidazole.

METHODS

Four hundred and twenty H. pylori-positive patients without previous exposure to triple therapy and 104 patients who had already received one course of triple therapy underwent upper endoscopy for dyspeptic symptoms and H. pylori susceptibility test. Amoxicillin, clarithromycin, tinidazole and rifabutin were evaluated for resistance and susceptibility. Forty patients with primary resistance to both clarithromycin and tinidazole and with susceptibility to amoxicillin and rifabutin, and 65 patients with secondary resistance and susceptibility to the same antibiotics were identified. All these patients received a 10-day triple therapy with pantoprazole amoxicillin and rifabutin. Treatment success was evaluated by the 13C-Urea Breath test.

RESULTS

In naive patients 23% of strains were resistant to clarythromycin, 35% to tinidazole, 9% to both antibiotics, and none was resistant to rifabutin In patients already treated the percentages of resistant strains were 76, 64.4, 62.5 and 1%, respectively. With rifabutin based triple therapy eradication rates were (Per Protocol and Intention-to-Treat analysis) 100 and 87.5% in primary resistance to clarithromycin and tinidazole and 82.2 and 78.5% in secondary resistance.

CONCLUSION

H. pylori primary and secondary resistances to clarithromycin and tinidazole are high in our geographic area, while resistance to rifabutin is rare. Rifabutin-based triple therapy, can be successfully used in primary and secondary resistance to clarithromycin and tinidazole according to the in vitro susceptibility test.