European Registry on the management of Helicobacter pylori infection (Hp-EuReg): analysis of 2360 patients receiving first-line therapy in Russia

AIM

European Registry on the management of Helicobacter pylori infection («Hp-EuReg») - a multicenter prospective observational study initiated by the European Helicobacter and Microbiota Study Group, conducted in 27 European countries in order to evaluate the real clinical practice of diagnosis and treatment of H. pylori and its comparison with international recommendations.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The analysis of 2360 patients entered in the register by the Russian centres of «Hp-EuReg» in 2013-2017, who were underwent 1st line eradication therapy.

RESULTS

The most common methods of primary diagnosis of H. pylori are histological (37.7%), rapid urease test (29.2%) and serology (29.7%). The duration of eradication therapy in 9.4% of cases was 7 days, in 65.3% - 10 days, and in 25.3% - 14 days. To control the effec- tiveness of treatment, H. pylori antigen in feces (31.3%), urea breath test (23.4%) and histological method (23.3%) were used. In 3.6% cases was used serology by mistake. In 17.3% of patients control was not carried out. The effectiveness of triple therapy with a PPI, amoxicillin, clar- ithromycin (per protocol) was 67.6%, with 7-day course, 81.1% at 10-day and 86.7% at 14-day course. Eradication rate of triple therapy with addition of bismuth (per protocol) reached 90,6% in the group receiving 10-day scheme and 93.6% in the group receiving the 14-day treatment.

CONCLUSION

Significant deviations of clinical practice from expert recommendations, most pronounced at the stage of monitoring the effectiveness of therapy, were noted. The suboptimal efficacy of triple therapy is shown.

Russian consensus on exo- and endocrine pancreatic insufficiency after surgical treatment

The Russian consensus on exo- and endocrine pancreatic insufficiency after surgical treatment was prepared on the initiative of the Russian "Pancreatic Club" on the Delphi method. His goal was to clarify and consolidate the opinions of specialists on the most relevant issues of diagnosis and treatment of exo- and endocrine insufficiency after surgical interventions on the pancreas. An interdisciplinary approach is provided by the participation of leading gastroenterologists and surgeons.

[European registry Helicobacter pylori (Hp-EuReg): how has clinical practice changed in Russia from 2013 to 2018 years]

The multicenter prospective observational study initiated by the European Helicobacter and Microbiota Study Group (EHMSG) is conducted in 27 countries in Europe. The data from the Russian part of the European registry for the management of Helicobacter pylori infection (European Registry on the management of Helicobacter pylori infection, protocol: "Hp-EuReg") allows us to analyze the real clinical practice of diagnosis and treatment of H. pylori and compare it with international recommendations.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A comparative analysis of the data entered in the register by the Russian research centers "Hp-EuReg", in the period from 2013 to 2018, was conducted.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Invasive diagnostic methods prevail for the primary diagnosis of H. pylori [histology - 20.3% (in 2013 year) - 43.9% (in 2018 year), rapid urease test - 31.7% and 47.8% respectively]. The most popular mode of eradication therapy is a 10-day triple therapy (62.8-76.2%), the effectiveness of which does not exceed 79% (per protocol). Invasive tests (histology) are the leading method for control the effectiveness of therapy, however, there is a tendency towards a wider use of non-invasive methods (H. pylori stool antigen - from 17% in 2013 to 29.3% in 2018 and urea breath test from 6.9 to 18.3%, respectively). Serological test to control the effectiveness of eradication is still used from 8.2% (2013) to 6.1% (2018). Eradication therapy was not performed in 28% of patients throughout the entire observation period.

CONCLUSION

In Russia, despite approved domestic and international recommendations, deviations in clinical practice persist, both during eradication therapy and in monitoring the effectiveness of eradication therapy.

The Russian consensus on the diagnosis and treatment of chronic pancreatitis: Enzyme replacement therapy

Pancreatology Club Professional Medical Community, 1A.S. Loginov Moscow Clinical Research and Practical Center, Moscow Healthcare Department, Moscow; 2A.I. Evdokimov Moscow State University of Medicine and Dentistry, Ministry of Health of Russia, Moscow; 3Kazan State Medical University, Ministry of Health of Russia, Kazan; 4Kazan (Volga) Federal University, Kazan; 5Far Eastern State Medical University, Ministry of Health of Russia, Khabarovsk; 6Morozov City Children’s Clinical Hospital, Moscow Healthcare Department, Moscow; 7I.I. Mechnikov North-Western State Medical University, Ministry of Health of Russia, Saint Petersburg; 8Siberian State Medical University, Ministry of Health of Russia, Tomsk; 9M.F. Vladimirsky Moscow Regional Research Clinical Institute, Moscow; 10Maimonides State Classical Academy, Moscow; 11V.I. Razumovsky State Medical University, Ministry of Health of Russia, Saratov; 12I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University, Ministry of Health of Russia, Moscow; 13S.M. Kirov Military Medical Academy, Ministry of Defense of Russia, Saint Petersburg; 14Surgut State Medical University, Ministry of Health of Russia, Surgut; 15City Clinical Hospital Five, Moscow Healthcare Department, Moscow; 16Nizhny Novgorod Medical Academy, Ministry of Health of Russia, Nizhny Novgorod; 17Territorial Clinical Hospital Two, Ministry of Health of the Krasnodar Territory, Krasnodar; 18Saint Petersburg State Pediatric Medical University, Ministry of Health of Russia, Saint Petersburg; 19Rostov State Medical University, Ministry of Health of Russia, Rostov-on-Don; 20Omsk Medical University, Ministry of Health of Russia, Omsk; 21Russian Medical Academy of Postgraduate Education, Ministry of Health of Russia, Moscow; 22Novosibirsk State Medical University, Ministry of Health of Russia, Novosibirsk; 23Stavropol State Medical University, Ministry of Health of Russia, Stavropol; 24Kemerovo State Medical University, Ministry of Health of Russia, Kemerovo; 25N.I. Pirogov Russian National Research Medical University, Ministry of Health of Russia, Moscow; 26A.M. Nikiforov All-Russian Center of Emergency and Radiation Medicine, Russian Ministry for Civil Defense, Emergencies and Elimination of Consequences of Natural Disasters, Saint Petersburg; 27Research Institute for Medical Problems of the North, Siberian Branch, Russian Academy of Sciences, Krasnoyarsk; 28S.P. Botkin City Clinical Hospital, Moscow Healthcare Department, Moscow; 29Tver State Medical University, Ministry of Health of Russia, Tver The Russian consensus on the diagnosis and treatment of chronic pancreatitis has been prepared on the initiative of the Russian Pancreatology Club to clarify and consolidate the opinions of Russian specialists (gastroenterologists, surgeons, and pediatricians) on the most significant problems of diagnosis and treatment of chronic pancreatitis. This article continues a series of publications explaining the most significant interdisciplinary consensus statements and deals with enzyme replacement therapy.

The Russian consensus on the diagnosis and treatment of chronic pancreatitis

1Moscow Clinical Research and Practical Center, Moscow Healthcare Department, Moscow; 2A.I. Evdokimov Moscow State University of Medicine and Dentistry, Ministry of Health of Russia, Moscow; 3Kazan State Medical University, Kazan; 4Kazan (Volga) Federal University, Kazan; 5Far Eastern State Medical University, Ministry of Health of Russia, Khabarovsk; 6Morozov City Children’s Clinical Hospital, Moscow Healthcare Department, Moscow; 7I.I. Mechnikov North-Western State Medical University, Ministry of Health of Russia, Saint Petersburg; 8Siberian State Medical University, Ministry of Health of Russia, Tomsk; 9M.F. Vladimirsky Moscow Regional Research Clinical Institute, Moscow; 10Maimonides State Classical Academy, Moscow; 11V.I. Razumovsky Saratov State Medical University, Saratov; 12I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University, Ministry of Health of Russia, Moscow; 13S.M. Kirov Military Medical Academy, Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation, Saint Petersburg; 14Surgut State Medical University, Ministry of Health of Russia, Surgut; 15City Clinical Hospital Five, Moscow Healthcare Department, Moscow; 16Nizhny Novgorod Medical Academy, Ministry of Health of Russia, Nizhny Novgorod; 17Territorial Clinical Hospital Two, Ministry of Health of the Krasnodar Territory, Krasnodar; 18Saint Petersburg State Pediatric Medical University, Ministry of Health of Russia, Saint Petersburg; 19Rostov State Medical University, Ministry of Health of Russia, Rostov-on-Don; 20Omsk Medical University, Ministry of Health of Russia, Omsk; 21Russian Medical Academy of Postgraduate Education, Ministry of Health of Russia, Moscow; 22Novosibirsk State Medical University, Novosibirsk; 23Stavropol State Medical University, Ministry of Health of Russia, Stavropol; 24Kemerovo State Medical University, Ministry of Health of Russia, Kemerovo; 25N.I. Pirogov Russian Research Medical University, Ministry of Health of Russia, Moscow; 26A.M. Nikiforov All-Russian Center of Emergency and Radiation Medicine, Ministry of Emergency Situations of Russia, Saint Petersburg; 27Federal Research Center, Krasnoyarsk Research Center, Siberian Branch, Russian Academy of Sciences, Research Institute of Medical Problems of the North, Krasnoyarsk; 28S.P. Botkin City Clinical Hospital, Moscow Healthcare Department, Moscow; 29Tver State Medical University, Ministry of Health of Russia, Tver The Russian consensus (a consensus document) on the diagnosis and treatment of chronic pancreatitis has been prepared on the initiative of the Russian «Pancreatic Club» under the Delphi system. Its aim was to identify and consolidate the opinions of Russian experts on the most topical issues of the diagnosis and treatment of chronic pancreatitis. The interdisciplinary approach involved the participation of leading gastroenterologists, surgeons, and pediatricians.

[HEPATIC ENCEPHALOPATHY AND TISSUE ZINC LEVELS IN LIVER DISEASE, DIAGNOSIS AND TREATMENT]

THE PURPOSE OF THE REVIEW: Description One of the complications of liver disease--hepatic encephalopathy as well as its relationship with the content of zinc in the body. THE MAIN PROVISIONS: The review provides the key moments of the pathophysiology and clinical hepatic encephalopathy. The basic drugs and treatment regimens of hepatic encephalopathy. Data are considered the original author's research on the relationship of gravity of hepatic encephalopathy and tissue zinc levels in patients with hepatitis and cirrhosis of viral etiology. The data of modern meta-analyzes of complex treatment of hepatic encephalopathy and the role of L-ornithine-L-aspartate.

CONCLUSION

Understanding the pharmacological mechanisms of action of L-ornithine-L-aspartate allow gastroenterologist physicians and general practitioners to adequately apply the drug, select the required readings and prioritize the treatment of patients with liver diseases at different stages of the disease. Should be included in the treatment regimen of hepatic encephalopathy zinc supplements.

[ISCHEMIC REPERFUSION INJURY OF HEPATOCYTES IN THE PRESERVATION OF THE LIVER TRANSPLANT]

This review is dedicated to one of the problems of liver transplantation and how to solve it. The incidence of complications after liver transplantation depends on ischemia-reperfusion injury of the graft. The global shortage of donor organs, using different technologies for conservation and graft function. This article describes the basic pathogenesis and proposed a new method for the prevention of ischemia reperfusion injury of the liver.