Furazolidone-based Triple Therapy For Helicobacter Pylori: A Clinical Analysis Of 108 Cases

Objective:To observe the efficacy, safety and symptom improvement of Furazolidone-based therapy in the eradication of Helicobacter pylori infection, calculate the cost of treatment, analyze the cost-effectiveness(C/E) and aim at looking for cost-effective of treatment regimens for the eradication of Helicobacter pylori.Methods:Patients were divided randomly into three groups:one group received Furazolidone-based bigeminy therapy (Group A), the second group received Furazolidone-based triple therapy (Group B), and the third group received standard triple therapy(Group C),36 patients in each group. Group A was administered pantoprazole capsules 40mg bid plus furazolidone tablets 100mg tid, for 1 week; Group B was administered pantoprazole capsules 40mg bid plus furazolidone tablets 100mg tid plus colloidal bismuth pectin dry suspension 150mg qid, for 1 week; Group C was administered pantoprazole capsules 40mg bid plus amoxicillin dicloxacillin sodium capsules 1.5g bid plus Clarithromycin sustained-release capsules 0.5g qd, for 1 week.①Record the detailed case history of every patient; the results of their endoscopy, their treatment and countercheck; and the side effects of medications. Hp diagnosis criteria:rapid urease test positive and W-S silver staining positive. Undertake rapid urease test and W-S silver staining later. The follow-up was performed at the first week, the second week, the third week and the fifth week after the treatment.②Observe Hp eradication one month after completion of therapy.③Analyze cost-effectiveness among the above three kinds of treatments with Pharmacoeconomics.Results:2 patients missed out on follow-up in Group A,1 patient in Group B and Group C respectively.①The eradication rate of Group A, Group B and Group C were 64.7%, 91.4% and 88.6%, respectively; the difference in the eradication rate of Helicobacter pylori between Group A and Group C was significant(P<0.05), while the difference between Group B and Group C was not significant (P> 0.05).②In the first week, the incidence of side effects among Group A, Group B and Group C were 14.7%,11.4% and 8.6%, respectively; no significant difference was found (P> 0.05) between the furazolidone-based group and the standard triple group; in the second week and the fifth week, there were no further side- effects.③In the second week and the third week, there was significant difference(P<0.05)in the improvement of symptoms between Group A and Group C, while there was not significant difference(P> 0.05) between Group B and Group C in the fifth week, no significant difference was observed (P> 0.05) between the furazolidone-based group and the standard triple group.④Pharmacoeconomic analysis showed that the ratio of cost-effectiveness of the furazolidone-based triple group was obviously better than that of the standard triple group.Conclusion:The efficacy and the incidence of side-effects of the furazolidone, pantoprazole and colloidal bismuth pectin dry suspension triple therapy is similar to that of the standard triple therapy. Based on cost-effectiveness analysis, the furazolidone-based triple therapy was superior to the standard triple therapy.