Moxifloxacin-based triple therapy versus clarithromycin-based triple therapy for first-line treatment of Helicobacter pylori infection: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Moxifloxacin-based triple therapy has been suggested as an alternative first line therapy to clarithromycin-based triple therapy for Helicobacter pylori infection. AIMS: To systematically review the efficacy and tolerance of moxifloxacin-based triple therapy, and to conduct a meta-analysis of studies comparing this regimen with clarithromycin-based triple therapy. METHODS: A search of The Cochrane Library, PUBMED, EMBASE, EBM Review databases, Science Citation Index Expanded, and CMB (Chinese Biomedical Literature Database) was performed. Randomized controlled trials comparing moxifloxacin-based triple therapy to gold standard triple therapy in the first-line treatment of Helicobacter pylori infection were selected for meta-analysis. Relative risk was used as a measure of the effect of the two above-mentioned regimens with a fixed-effects model using the methods of DerSimonian and Laird. RESULTS: Four randomized controlled trials totaling 772 patients were included. The meta-analysis showed that the mean eradication rate was 84.1 (318/378) in the moxifloxacin-based triple therapy group and 73.6 (290/394) in the clarithromycin-based triple therapy group; there was statistical significance between the two groups (RR, 1.13; 95% CI, 1.01, 1.27; P=0.04). There were no statistically significant difference in the overall side effects (RR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.25, 1.48; P<0.28). CONCLUSIONS: Moxifloxacin-based triple therapy is more effective and does not increase the incidence of overall side effects compared to clarithromycin-based triple therapy in the treatment of H. pylori infection.