Background Antibiotic resistance emerges as a major issue for Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) treatment. High‐dose dual therapy has recently shown encouraging results in H. pylori eradication, but it has yet to be validated in this H. pylori highly infected area; it is also not known if this concept can be extended to antibiotics other than amoxicillin, and factors that affect the eradication. We investigate if rabeprazole plus amoxicillin or furazolidone regimens could be a first‐line therapy for H. pylori eradication, and factors that affect the curing rate. Methods This is a single‐center, prospective, open‐label, randomized‐controlled trial. Naive patients (n=292) were randomly treated with bismuth‐containing quadruple therapy (BQT), rabeprazole plus amoxicillin (RADT), or furazolidone (RFDT) groups. RADT and FADT use three times daily regimens. H. pylori diagnosis and eradication were determined and confirmed by 13C‐urea breath test. Results In per‐protocol (PP) analysis, H. pylori eradication rate was 91.2% in BQT group, 89.6% in RADT, and 51.0% in RFDT group. In intention‐to‐treat (ITT) analysis, infection was eradicated in 86.7% of patients in BQT group, 85.8% in RADT, and 48.1% in RFDT groups, respectively. Noninferiority was confirmed between BQT and RADT groups. The incidence of side effects in BQT group was significantly higher than that in RADT group. Successful eradication was associated with lower body surface area (BSA) and low body mass index (BMI) in BQT group. Smoking and high BSA index reduced H. pylori eradication rate in RADT group. Conclusions Rabeprazole‐amoxicillin dual therapy is equally effective to the bismuth‐containing quadruple therapy for H. pylori eradication with fewer side effects and saves use of one antibiotic per each treatment. Successful eradication is also associated with low BSA and non‐smoking condition, which deserves future stratified analysis for refinement and optimization.

BACKGROUND Type I Helicobacter pylori ( H. pylori ) infection causes severe gastric inflammation and is a predisposing factor for gastric carcinogenesis. However, its infection status in stepwise gastric disease progression in this gastric cancer prevalent area has not been evaluated; it is also not known its impact on commonly used epidemiological gastric cancer risk markers such as gastrin-17 (G-17) and pepsinogens (PGs) during clinical practice. AIM To explore the prevalence of type I and type II H. pylori infection status and their impact on G-17 and PG levels in clinical practice. METHODS Thirty-five hundred and seventy-two hospital admitted patients with upper gastrointestinal symptoms were examined, and 523 patients were enrolled in this study. H. pylori infection was confirmed by both 13 C-urea breath test and serological assay. Patients were divided into non-atrophic gastritis (NAG), non-atrophic gastritis with erosion (NAGE), chronic atrophic gastritis (CAG), peptic ulcers (PU) and gastric cancer (GC) groups. Their serological G-17, PG I and PG II values and PG I/PG II ratio were also measured. RESULTS A total H. pylori infection rate of 3572 examined patients was 75.9%, the infection rate of 523 enrolled patients was 76.9%, among which type I H. pylori infection accounted for 72.4% (291/402) and type II was 27.6%; 88.4% of GC patients were H. pylori positive, and 84.2% of them were type I infection, only 11.6% of GC patients were H. pylori negative. Infection rates of type I H. pylori in NAG, NAGE, CAG, PU and GC groups were 67.9%, 62.7%, 79.7%, 77.6% and 84.2%, respectively. H. pylori infection resulted in significantly higher G-17 and PG II values and decreased PG I/PG II ratio. Both types of H. pylori induced higher G-17 level, but type I strain infection resulted in an increased PG II level and decreased PG I/PG II ratio in NAG, NAGE and CAG groups over uninfected controls. Overall PG I levels showed no difference among all disease groups and in the presence or absence of H. pylori; in stratified analysis, its level was increased in GC and PU patients in H. pylori and type I H. pylori- positive groups. CONCLUSION Type I H. pylori infection is the major form of infection in this geographic region, and a very low percentage (11.6%) of GC patients are not infected by H. pylori . Both types of H. pylori induce an increase in G-17 level, while type I H. pylori is the ma...

Background Two critical concerns during Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) eradication are the successful eradication and recurrence. It is debatable whether whole family‐based H. pylori treatment regimen might have any advantage over single‐infected patient treatment approach in increasing eradication rate and reducing recurrence rate. We conduct systematic review and meta‐analysis to compare the efficacy of these two treatment regimens in order to provide clinical practice a better option for H. pylori eradication. Methods Randomized controlled trials evaluating H. pylori eradication and recurrence in whole family‐based treatment group (WFTG) versus single‐infected patient treatment group (SPTG) were collected from published literature up to July 2020 from common databases. Pooled results were analyzed using either fixed‐effect or random‐effect model. Results were expressed as the odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). Results A total of 1751 relevant articles were identified, and 12 studies were eligible for analysis. Among them: (a) Eight articles including 1198 patients were selected to analyze H. pylori eradication rate, pooled result showed that eradication rate of WFTG was higher than that of SPTG (OR=2.93; 95% CI 1.68–5.13). Stratified analysis showed that H. pylori eradication rate in WFTG were higher over SPTG in children subgroup, but had no difference in spouse subgroup. (b) Six studies including 881 patients were analyzed for recurrence rate between the two groups, pooled analysis showed that the overall recurrence rate of WFTG was lower than that of SPTG (OR=0.3; 95% CI 0.19–0.48). Stratified analysis showed that the recurrence rate in WFTG was lower over SPTG at 6, 12, 18, and more than 24 months post‐treatment subgroups. Conclusion Whole family‐based H. pylori treatment can partially increase eradication rate and reduce recurrence rate over single‐infected patient treatment approach, the results provide clinical practice a novel notion for H. pylori eradication and infection prevention.