Antibiotic resistance is directly related to the loss of efficacy of currently accepted Helicobacter pylori therapies. Knowledge of the antibiotic susceptibility in a local area can contribute to the design of specific ‘à la carte’ treatments. The aim of this study was to analyse the susceptibility of H. pylori isolates to six conventional antibiotics currently used in a northern region of Spain. Seventy-one isolates were obtained from gastric biopsies of 76 consecutive adult patients suffering from peptic ulcer disease, dyspepsia or familial gastric cancer and known to be infected with H. pylori by conventional methods. Susceptibility testing was performed for amoxicillin, ciprofloxacin, levofloxacin, clarithromycin, metronidazole and tetracycline using the Etest method. The prevalence rates of resistance were as follows: amoxicillin, 1.4% [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.0–7.6]; clarithromycin, 14.7% (95% CI 7.3–25.4); ciprofloxacin, 14.3% (95% CI 7.1–24.7); levofloxacin, 14.5% (95% CI 7.2–25.0); metronidazole, 45.1% (95% CI 33.2–57.3); and tetracycline, 0% (95% CI 0.0–5.1). Our study confirms an increasing rate of resistance to levofloxacin that equals that of clarithromycin in our healthcare area. This fact may reflect a wide and indiscriminate use of the former antibiotic and could account for a loss of clinical effectiveness of levofloxacin-containing regimens. Moreover, clarithromycin resistance rates remain stable, which could allow us to maintain its use in our area.

Background: Limited data regarding altered linezolid pharmacokinetics in patients with liver cirrhosis are available. The objective of this study was to evaluate the pharmacokinetics, efficacy and safety of linezolid in cirrhotic patients. Methods: A case–control 1:1 study of patients undergoing linezolid therapeutic drug monitoring was conducted between January 2015 and June 2017. Cases with liver cirrhosis were matched with controls by age, body weight, comorbidities, renal function, and intensive care unit (ICU) admission. Results: Fifty-two patients were included, 26 in each group. Patients with Child–Pugh Scores A, B, and C were 1 (3.8%), 13 (50.0%), and 12 (46.2%), respectively. Cases had higher median linezolid trough plasma concentrations than controls [20.6 (17.4) versus 2.7 (11.3); P < 0.001)] and more frequently achieved an optimal pharmacodynamic index [26 (100%) versus 16 (61.5%); P = 0.002]. In addition, potentially toxic concentrations and treatment discontinuation due to overexposure and hematological toxicity were also more frequently seen in cirrhotic patients. Overall clinical cure rate was high (67.4%), and in-hospital mortality was 28.8%. No differences in clinical outcomes were observed between both groups. Conclusions: Linezolid showed a high clinical cure rate. Nevertheless, plasma concentrations and treatment discontinuation due to hematological toxicity were higher in cirrhotic patients. Liver cirrhosis may influence linezolid pharmacokinetics and question the use of standard doses. Therapeutic drug monitoring of linezolid would be valuable in these patients.

(1) Background: Patients with advanced chronic liver disease (ACLD) are living longer with more comorbidities because of improved medical and surgical management. However, patients with ACLD are at increased risk of perioperative morbidity and mortality; (2) Methods: We conducted a comprehensive review of the literature to support a narrative clinical guideline about the assessment of mortality risk and management of perioperative morbidity in patients with ACLD undergoing surgical procedures; (3) Results: Slight data exist to guide the perioperative management of patients with ACLD, and most recommendations are based on case series and expert opinion. The severity of liver dysfunction, portal hypertension, cardiopulmonary and renal comorbidities, and complexity of surgery and type (elective versus emergent) are predictors of perioperative morbidity and mortality. Expert multidisciplinary teams are necessary to evaluate and manage ACLD before, during, and after surgical procedures; (4) Conclusions: This clinical practice document updates the available data and recommendations to optimize the management of patients with advanced chronic liver disease who undergo surgical procedures.

There is growing evidence that the standard triple therapy against Helicobacter pylori infection is losing clinical effectiveness. A triple therapy regimen with levofloxacin, amoxicillin and a proton pump inhibitor has been reported to be effective and well tolerated, and this regimen has been suggested as an alternative first-line treatment. The aim of this single-blind randomized clinical trial was to compare the eradication success of two first-line triple therapy regimens in the north of Spain: clarithromycin, amoxicillin and omeprazole (CAO) versus levofloxacin, amoxicillin and omeprazole (LAO). A total of 250 consecutive patients diagnosed by conventional methods with H. pylori infection were randomized into one of two 10 day therapeutic regimens: standard CAO (n = 128) or LAO (n = 122). Eradication was confirmed by the ¹³C-urea breath test. Adverse effects and compliance were also assessed. The clinical trial registration number was HPL08001HCLAD (EudraCT: 2008-001892-31). Intention-to-treat cure rates were: CAO, 75.0% (96/128; 95% CI: 66.6%–82.2%) and LAO, 82.8% (101/122; 95% CI: 74.9%–89.0%). Per-protocol cure rates were: CAO, 78.0% (96/123; 95% CI: 69.7%–85.0%) and LAO, 83.1% (98/118; 95% CI: 75.0%–89.3%). There were no statistically significant differences in effectiveness between the two regimens. In addition, no relevant differences in compliance or adverse effects were demonstrated. Levofloxacin-based treatment for H. pylori infection did not improve upon the eradication rate of the standard clarithromycin-based triple therapy in this study. This may reflect the progressive increase in in vitro resistance rates to levofloxacin observed in our region.