Prospective comparative study of the treatment of Helicobacter pylori with antibiotic susceptibility testing-guided triple therapy compared to quadruple therapy with bismuth-metronidazole-tetracycline subcitrate.

INTRODUCTION: the current indicated first-line treatment for Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) infection is the quadruple therapy with bismuth (Pylera®), or the quadruple concomitant therapy without bismuth. The triple therapy was abandoned due to its low eradication rates, partly derived from an increase in antibiotic resistance. The aim of this study was to compare the H. pylori eradication rates guided by antibiotic susceptibility testing (AST) versus Pylera®. METHODS: a specimen was taken prospectively for culture and antibiotic susceptibility testing (AST) from all patients diagnosed with H. pylori infection using gastroscopy, and they were randomized to receive triple therapy depending on the results of the AST, or quadruple therapy with Pylera®. The eradication rates of both groups were analyzed using fecal antigen. The adherence and side effects of the treatment were also analyzed. RESULTS: of the 108 patients with H. pylori infection, 55 received Pylera® and 53 AST-guided triple therapy. The eradication rates were 92.7 % with Pylera® and 90.6 % in the AST-guided group, and the difference was statistically significant. There were also no differences found in adherence or side effects. CONCLUSIONS: the treatment of H. pylori with AST-guided triple therapy is effective, especially in regions with high rates of antibiotic resistance.

Luetic gastritis: an uncommon cause of gastritis

No disponible

Luetic gastritis: an uncommon cause of gastritis.

A 41-year-old patient presented to the Dermatology clinic with a papular rash on the trunk and orange-colored maculopapular lesions on the soles of both feet. This was associated with general symptoms including myalgia, fatigue, epigastric pain, nausea and vomiting. The patient had been taking omeprazole and cinitapride with little improvement.

Severe cardiorespiratory complications derived from propofol sedation monitored by an endoscopist.

INTRODUCTION: deep sedation with propofol monitored by an endoscopist in different endoscopy units is a controversial subject and the source of conflicts of interest between the various scientific societies of Anesthesiology and Gastroenterology. Many studies have already demonstrated the efficacy, efficiency and low incidence of complications associated with sedation when under the control of a trained endoscopist vs an anesthesiologist. MATERIAL AND METHODS: the rate of severe cardiorespiratory complications during various endoscopic examinations (gastroscopy, colonoscopy, endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography [ERCP] and endoscopic ultrasound [EUS]) where sedation was controlled by an endoscopist within our unit, from 2011 to 2016, was reviewed. RESULTS: during the study period, 33,195 examinations were analyzed. The rate of cardiorespiratory complications was 0.13% and the majority were severe desaturations. Most cases responded to an opening in the airway associated with the interruption of drug infusion and an ambu bag was required in a few cases. There were no statistically significant differences between the different groups, except for mean age, risk by type of examination and ASA risk, where the difference between ERCP and the rest of examinations was statistically significant. CONCLUSION: there is a high level of evidence in the scientific literature suggesting that sedation controlled by a trained endoscopist is safe, effective and efficient. However, further prospective studies are required in order to confirm this conclusion due to the fact that the majority of studies to date are retrospective.