Peptic Ulcer Diseases: Genetics, Mechanism, and TherapiesView this Special Issue
Diagnosis, Treatment, and Outcome in Patients with Bleeding Peptic Ulcers and Helicobacter pylori Infections
Upper gastrointestinal (UGI) bleeding is the most frequently encountered complication of peptic ulcer disease. Helicobacter pylori (Hp) infection and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) administration are two independent risk factors for UGI bleeding. Therefore, testing for and diagnosing Hp infection are essential for every patient with UGI hemorrhage. The presence of the infection is usually underestimated in cases of bleeding peptic ulcers. A rapid urease test (RUT), with or without histology, is usually the first test performed during endoscopy. If the initial diagnostic test is negative, a delayed 13C-urea breath test (UBT) or serology should be performed. Once an infection is diagnosed, antibiotic treatment is advocated. Sufficient evidence supports the concept that Hp infection eradication can heal the ulcer and reduce the likelihood of rebleeding. With increased awareness of the effects of Hp infection, the etiologies of bleeding peptic ulcers have shifted to NSAID use, old age, and disease comorbidity.
Left untreated, peptic ulcer diseases (PUD) will cause major complications, such as hemorrhage, perforation, or obstruction in 20–25% of patients. Among these complications, upper gastrointestinal (UGI) bleeding is the most frequently encountered, accounting for about 70% of cases [1, 2]. With the discovery of Helicobacter pylori (Hp) , the pathogenic relationship between PUD and Hp infection has come into focus. Worldwide consensus guidelines recommend the mandatory eradication of Hp in patient with PUD [4–13].
Another independent risk factor for PUD and subsequent UGI bleeding is the administration of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) . Those patients requiring long-term NSAID treatment should be screened for Hp status, and Hp eradication is suggested before administering NSAIDs . Writing prescriptions for aspirin and antiplatelet agents is a common clinical scenario that creates new challenges related to UGI bleeding in gastroenterological practices [15, 16]. However, the relationship between the use of these medications and UGI bleeding is beyond the scope of this paper. Here, we will elucidate the relationship between bleeding peptic ulcers and Hp infection from the chronological perspective with an emphasis on diagnosis, treatments, and outcomes.
2. Materials and Methods
We searched Pubmed (to 15 March 2014). Overall, we identified 708, 526, and 120 with the following key word combinations: “bleeding peptic ulcer AND Helicobacter pylori diagnosis,” “bleeding peptic ulcer AND Helicobacter pylori treatment,” and “bleeding peptic ulcer AND Helicobacter pylori outcome,” respectively.
Medical subject headings (MeSH) terms were employed to assist the search, and the results were reviewed by the authors. We also conducted a manual search of material from several congresses. The paper selection criteria included (1) discussion with diagnosis, treatment, or outcome of bleeding peptic ulcers and Hp infection and (2) publication in full manuscript form in English. Finally, 129 articles were selected, and their reference lists were checked for other possible studies for inclusion.
3. Results and Discussion
The diagnosis of Hp infection is based on both invasive and noninvasive methods. Endoscopy is an invasive method, which includes a rapid urease test (RUT), histology, culturing, and polymerase chain reaction (PCR). The noninvasive methods include serology antibody assessment, 13C-urea breath test (UBT), and stool antigen testing. There are only minimal differences in the accuracies of the invasive tests. Among them, the RUT is the most frequently used. The UBT is the recommended noninvasive test . Recently, the monoclonal stool antigen test has also been suggested . The prevalence of Hp infection in noncomplicated PUD has been reported to be high in duodenal ulcer patients and moderate in gastric ulcer patients, regardless of which test is performed [19, 20]. However, there have been discrepant test results among patients with bleeding peptic ulcers. The individual diagnostic tests are discussed below.
The RUT is the most common examination for patients with UGI bleeding because endoscopy is always performed in such cases. An early study from Hong Kong disclosed a high false-negative rate for urease tests from antral biopsies in bleeding ulcer patients . Almost simultaneously, we reported delayed positive results on the CLO test (color change after 24 hours) in our bleeding peptic ulcer patients if there was blood in the gastric antrum . Another study from Greece demonstrated similar results at the same meeting . These studies were further elucidated in subsequently published full articles [24–26].
Because there is always blood in the stomachs of patients with bleeding peptic ulcers, interference with RUT results by blood components is a concern. Several mechanisms have been suggested, including the bactericidal effect of serum inducing a transient decrease in bacterial density, the presence of anti-Hp antibodies inhibiting urease production, suppressed urease activity by serum enzymes or electrolytes, various buffering systems (e.g., albumin, bicarbonate, and phosphate) interfering with the pH level of the RUT reagent, and concomitant administration of NSAIDs or proton pump inhibitors (PPIs). In one in vitro study , a false-negative RUT result was caused by the buffering effects of serum albumin on the pH indicator but not on urease activity. Another in vitro study concluded that large gastric lavage before endoscopy can cause a false-negative RUT result . However, our study found no influence on the likelihood of a false-negative result if the gastric antral biopsy specimen was cleansed by normal saline before inoculating the wells for the CLO test . Similarly, another study concluded that an artificial blood-soaked antral specimen did not influence the results of two RUTs . The bactericidal effect of human plasma [31, 32] and the reduction in bacterial load by PPIs  have been demonstrated.
In subsequent studies worldwide [34–40], RUT was further confirmed to be less sensitive than other tests in the diagnosis of Hp infection in bleeding peptic ulcers. Another consideration is that Hp bacterial density may be patchy, and only using samples from the gastric antrum may be inadequate. Inappropriate biopsy site and inadequate specimens are other explanations of false-negative results of RUT in patients with UGI bleeding. (Blood in stomach could induce Hp migration to corpus and fundus and the decrease of bacterial density in the antrum. Fewer amounts of specimens are obtained during emergent endoscopy procedure.) Simultaneous antral and body specimens or multiple biopsies have been found to produce more positive RUTs [41, 42]. Most authors concluded that the RUT cannot be the only diagnostic test in such circumstances . If the initial diagnostic test is negative, a delayed test 4–8 weeks later can have up to an 80% positive rate in previously negative patients .
Different studies have reported low sensitivity with histologic methods, which is consistent with RUT sensitivity. This suggests that histology cannot reliably exclude Hp infection in patients with bleeding peptic ulcers [24, 34]. However, other studies have reported that histology is more sensitive than RUT [24, 25, 35, 36]. As previously mentioned, patchy distribution of bacterial density can be one factor, but the staining method and pathologist’s interpretations also influence the results . Others have suggested that the prevalence of Hp infection is probably the same among bleeding and nonbleeding patients . The sensitivity of histology also relies on the experience of the endoscopist to take the biopsy from the appropriate site. Some publications had shown that atrophic change, rugal hyperplasia, edema, and spotty erythema are valuable endoscopic findings of Hp infection. It is very important to avoid false-negative histology finding by taking the biopsy from RAC (regular arrangement of collecting venules) negative site . Therefore, combination tests should be performed to achieve a more precise diagnosis .
3.1.3. Culturing and PCR
Culturing Hp in patients with bleeding peptic ulcers produced a low yield in several studies [24, 34]. The reasons for its infrequent use include the time-consuming nature of the process due to the microanaerobic pathogen characteristics and the lack of time to perform the procedure during endoscopy.
Mucosal PCR has been used as an invasive test to diagnose Hp infection. In one study, this test was less sensitive in patients with bleeding peptic ulcers than for those with nonbleeding peptic ulcers and chronic gastritis . However, another study reported that PCR had higher sensitivity than other biopsy-based tests and similar sensitivity to noninvasive tests . The authors also demonstrated that blood may reduce the sensitivities of all biopsy-based tests. A study using real-time PCR can improve Hp detection in a histology-negative, formalin-fixed, and paraffin-embedded biopsy and is superior to immunohistochemical staining . Modified PCR could improve diagnostic accuracy in patients with UGI bleeding .
Many studies have confirmed that the 13C-UBT can accurately diagnose Hp infection [53, 54]. This statement also applies to patients with UGI bleeding [24, 26, 35, 36, 38]. The test’s sensitivity is not affected by blood in the stomach and is higher than those of biopsy-based methods and other noninvasive tests [55–57].
Because a subject must drink a urea-containing solution in conjunction with a test meal or citric acid, one might question whether this method is suitable for bleeding patients. Most UBTs are done when patients resume eating, or the UBT is reserved as a delayed test if the initial invasive methods are negative. However, using low-dose encapsulated 13C-urea has proven to be feasible in fasting patients or even before an endoscopy because it only takes a small amount of water to swallow a pill .
3.1.5. Stool Antigen Test
The stool Hp antigen test has been introduced as an accurate noninvasive test . It can be performed by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) with monoclonal or polyclonal antibodies or by immunochromatographic assay with monoclonal antibodies. The sensitivity of this method is reduced by UGI bleeding when polyclonal ELISA or immunochromatographic stool antigens are used [38, 60, 61]. Furthermore, it is not reliable in patients with bleeding peptic ulcers . Another study reported a high number of false-positive results in patients with UGI bleeding due to a cross-reaction with the blood . Therefore, the stool Hp antigen diagnostic test is not recommended for use in patients with UGI.
We  and others  have demonstrated that serology is more sensitive than other invasive tests in cases of bleeding peptic ulcer. It can be used as the initial invasive test, as an alternative test, or when the UBT test is negative. However, commercial serological tests must be confirmed by a local laboratory before they are used in an individual hospital . Additionally, if patients have been treated for Hp infection, serological tests have revealed that serum antibodies may last for up to a year . This fact must not be overlooked when interpreting the results.
3.1.7. NSAIDs, PPI, and Other Drugs with Bleeding PUD on Diagnosis Tests
No matter which diagnostic tests are employed in patients with bleeding PUD, physicians should preclude NSAID use. Many studies have confirmed the influence of NSAIDs on the sensitivities of the test results [66–68]. Hp infection and NSAID use are two independent factors related to bleeding peptic ulcers . In patients who are already on long-term NSAIDs, Hp eradication does not prevent the peptic ulcer from bleeding. Nevertheless, patients who require long-term NSAID medications should be tested for Hp infection in advance. Hp eradication can decrease the incidence of peptic ulcer bleeding. But in patients with long-term NSAIDs use, the cause of peptic ulcer bleeding should be NSAIDs use, not H. pylori status.
Another frequently encountered scenario is that most patients are given PPIs either intravenously or orally at the initial presentation of UGI bleeding, even before an endoscopic examination. There is concern over whether the recent use of a PPI interferes with the diagnostic accuracy for Hp infection. One study with a 3-day dosage of intravenous PPI in a bleeding peptic ulcer case found that a high infusion dose significantly impacts negative histology and RUT results as compared to a regular daily dose . Dose-dependent PPIs do produce short-term effects on Hp diagnosis. Recent PPI use may induce false-negative results on both invasive tests  and noninvasive tests, such as the UBT [71–74] and stool Hp antigen test . The duration of PPI administration can variably affect diagnostic accuracy. Usually, discontinuation of the drug for 2 weeks is recommended before performing any test, except serology.
Antisecretory medication is mandatory in patients with bleeding peptic ulcers. H2-receptor antagonists (H2RA) may be an alternative regimen. There are several studies evaluating H2RA and Hp diagnostic accuracy. Conflicting results exist, but most data indicate that these drugs have little influence on the Hp diagnosis [76, 77].
A systematic review and meta-analysis explored the accuracies of Hp diagnostic tests in patients with bleeding peptic ulcers . The authors found that biopsy-based methods had low sensitivity and high specificity; UBT had high accuracy; stool antigen tests were less accurate; and serology, though not influenced by UGI bleeding, was not recommended as the first test. Pooled data on sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative likelihood ratios are shown in Table 1. Because the positive likelihood ratio is high, positive invasive tests or UBT requires no further confirmation of Hp infection. However, the other delayed tests should not be overlooked.
A recent meta-regression study  suggested that the low prevalence of Hp infection in patients with bleeding peptic ulcers might be related to the methodology of the studies and to the patients’ characteristics. The authors found a higher prevalence of Hp infection when a delayed test was performed and when younger patients were included. They concluded that the prevalence of Hp infection had been underestimated in patients with bleeding peptic ulcers. They also suggested that a delayed diagnostic test should be carried out if the initial diagnostic test is negative, as recommended by the International Consensus .
3.2.1. Hp Eradication
Hp infection is still an important factor in peptic ulcer development. Eradication therapy is suggested for both duodenal and gastric ulcers in patients infected with Hp , regardless of whether they have complications. Although there is no direct causal relationship between Hp infection and early rebleeding in patients with peptic ulcer bleeding [80, 81], empirical Hp eradication as soon as patients resume eating is the most cost-effective strategy for preventing recurrent hemorrhage .
Many studies in the 1990s demonstrated the benefit of Hp eradication in decreasing peptic ulcer recurrences, as well as in bleeding cases. Using antibiotics to kill the bacteria was proven effective in preventing ulcer rebleeding in early studies [83, 84]. Other regimens using omeprazole and amoxicillin can also reduce the recurrence of peptic ulcer bleeding as compared to omeprazole or ranitidine alone [85–88]. The results were the same when the antibiotics were changed .
With the introduction of the ideal eradication regimen for Hp infection, triple therapy has been applied worldwide [90–92]. We previously reported that triple therapy can achieve a 91.3% eradication rate and a 97.1% ulcer healing rate in bleeding peptic ulcers . One study found that as long as antibiotic eradication or Hp infection suppression is achieved, bleeding can be reduced . Subsequent studies also confirmed that Hp eradication improves healing and decreases rebleeding [95–97].
The current dogma is that Hp eradication in bleeding peptic ulcers is superior to simple ulcer healing in preventing further ulcer hemorrhages [98, 99]. Therefore, testing for the presence of Hp infection and eradicating it are both mandatory and cost effective . While there has been concern over whether maintenance antisecretory treatment was necessary, the current position is that, as long as Hp is eradicated, peptic ulcer rebleeding is virtually eliminated. Therefore, antisecretory therapy is no longer required [101–104]. However, maintenance antisecretory therapy should be considered for Hp-eradicated patients who did not stop NSAID use.
We performed a prospective 5-year followup of patients after Hp eradication and assessed the healing of bleeding peptic ulcers . We randomized 82 consecutive patients into 4 different groups after 1 week of triple therapy and 3 weeks of PPI treatment. Despite 4 months of different maintenance regimens among the four groups (antacid suspension, colloidal bismuth, famotidine, or a placebo treatment), all the patients remained ulcer free with no evidence of reinfection. In recent pooled data of 1000 patients from 10 Spanish university hospitals and a total of 3253 patient-years of long-term followup, maintenance antiulcer treatment was not indicated once Hp had been eradicated . However, the recent Maastricht IV/Florence Consensus suggested that while maintenance antiulcer treatment is not needed for bleeding duodenal ulcers, it should be continued for gastric ulcers .
PPI treatment is usually administered to patients with bleeding peptic ulcers, even before endoscopic examination. This treatment can facilitate the endoscopic hemostatic effect in reducing short-term rebleeding [105, 106]. PPI treatment also has benefits for Hp eradication. One study demonstrated that intravenous omeprazole can decrease the risk of peptic ulcer rebleeding and may even improve the Hp eradication rate of the subsequent triple therapy .
Hp eradication after peptic ulcer bleeding reduces recurrence. Is confirmation of eradication of Hp worthwhile? One study using the Markov model proved that confirmation of Hp eradication after completion of antibiotic treatment in peptic ulcer bleeding is cost effective .
Eradication therapy is suggested in Hp-infected bleeding peptic ulcers. Triple therapy including a PPI and two antibiotics is the primary regimen. However, the rising antibiotic resistance rate should be taken into consideration in specific regions. Concomitant triple therapy, sequential therapy, bismuth- or non-bismuth-based quadruple therapy, and levofloxacin-based regimens are appropriate alternatives. After eradication, prolonged acid-suppressive therapy for duodenal ulcers is unnecessary, but gastric ulcers may require additional acid-suppressive therapy for 4–8 weeks due to their slow healing time and larger size.
3.3.1. Outcome with/without Hp Eradication
Among patients with peptic ulcer diseases, 20–25% develop bleeding, perforation, or obstruction. In patients with bleeding peptic ulcers, approximately 33% develop recurrent bleeding within 1-2 years if left untreated after the ulcer heals . Consequently, Hp eradication reduces the recurrence rate of peptic ulcers . As mentioned previously, several studies have also reported a low rebleeding rate after Hp eradication, even without acid-suppressive drug maintenance [83–89, 95, 96, 101, 109, 111–116]. A multicenter Spanish cohort study with similar findings was published recently, and comparative results with other studies are shown in Table 2.
Posttreatment Hp status has been found to be an independent predictor of duodenal ulcer bleeding recurrence . Followup Hp testing after eradication in cases of bleeding peptic ulcers is therefore beneficial . Because recrudescence is more common than reinfection , physicians should use combined tests or select a much lower cut-off value for 13C-UBT to verify eradication success.
Is there a trend toward decreasing Hp-related bleeding peptic ulcers today? The answer is yes. After the global implementation of Hp eradication for PUDs, the incidence of Hp-infected UGI hemorrhage has decreased. A 10-year nationwide database from Taiwan also demonstrated 42–48% and 41–71% decreases in the incidence of hospitalization for gastric ulcers and duodenal ulcers, respectively, and these rates included uncomplicated and complicated cases . Similar results have also been reported in other countries .
Nevertheless, bleeding peptic ulcers remain a worldwide problem. The increasing use of NSAIDs is considered to be an important underlying cause. Many studies have confirmed that current UGI bleeding in patients can be attributed to NSAID usage [122–126]. One study from the United States found that admission for PUD-related complications has not decreased despite decreasing Hp prevalence and increasing Hp eradication , and the authors proposed that this could be due to NSAID use. Meanwhile, Hp eradication can decrease the long-term incidence of recurrent ulcer bleeding in low-dose aspirin users . Eliminating one independent risk factor can attenuate the effect of another independent factor on inducing peptic ulcer bleeding. A recent study found that patients with bleeding peptic ulcers and concurrent Hp infection have a more favorable outcome than those without .
Hp infection is an independent risk factor for bleeding duodenal ulcers. Hp-infected gastric ulcers in combination with old age and NSAID or aspirin therapy may increase the bleeding risk. Eradication treatment can decrease the likelihood of peptic ulcer rebleeding and associated complications. Admissions for bleeding peptic ulcers have not decreased despite the eradication of Hp infections. Concomitant administration of NSAIDs, old age, and comorbidities are currently considered as risk factors for UGI bleeding.
Three decades after the discovery of Hp, the etiologies of bleeding peptic ulcers are changing. However, diagnosis of Hp infection is still the first priority in these patients. Invasive RUT is most frequently used, but this methodology is hampered by a high rate of false-negative results, especially in patients with UGI bleeding. Other delayed tests should be performed if the initial diagnostic test is negative. Eradication of Hp infection can reduce the risk of rebleeding and should be started as soon as patients resume eating. Concomitant use of NSAIDs, aspirin, or other antiplatelet drugs associated with old age and comorbidities is the most likely etiology for current bleeding peptic ulcers. Hp eradication is beneficial for patients who require the long-term administration of these drugs.
Conflict of Interests
The authors declare that there is no conflict of interests regarding the publication of this paper.
The authors thank Dr. Martin Meng-Lin Lee from Hsinchu Mackay Memorial Hospital for assistance with the paper.
B. J. Marshall and J. R. Warren, “Unidentified curved bacilli in the stomach of patients with gastritis and peptic ulceration,” The Lancet, vol. 1, no. 8390, pp. 1311–1314, 1984.View at: Google Scholar
NIH Consensus Conference, “NIH Consensus Development Panel on Helicobacter pylori in peptic ulcer disease. Helicobacter pylori in peptic ulcer disease,” The Journal of the American Medical Association, vol. 272, no. 1, pp. 65–69, 1994.View at: Google Scholar
G. Castillo-Rojas, M. A. Ballesteros, S. Ponce de León, R. Morales-Espinosa, A. Cravioto, and Y. López-Vidal, “Bleeding peptic ulcers and presence of Helicobacter pylori by various tests: a case-control study,” European Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, vol. 14, no. 10, pp. 1113–1118, 2002.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
K.-C. Lai, W.-M. Hui, and S.-K. Lam, “Bleeding ulcers have high false negative rates for antral Helicobacter pylori when tested with urease test,” Gastroenterology, vol. 110, no. 4, p. A167, 1996.View at: Google Scholar
C.-L. Lee, T.-C. Tu, R.-N. Yang et al., “Does blood in the stomach influence the diagnosis of H. pylori infection in patients with bleeding peptic ulcer?” Gut, vol. 41, supplement 1, p. A76, 1997.View at: Google Scholar
A. Archimandritis, M. Tzivras, S. Souyioultzis et al., “High rates of false negative rapid urease test (CLO) in patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGB),” Gut, vol. 41, supplement 1, p. A76, 1997.View at: Google Scholar
A. Archimandritis, M. Tzivras, S. Sougioultzis et al., “Rapid urease test is less sensitive than histology in diagnosing Helicobacter pylori infection in patients with non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding,” Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, vol. 15, no. 4, pp. 369–373, 2000.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
C.-C. Liao, C.-L. Lee, Y.-C. Lai et al., “Accuracy of three diagnostic tests used alone and in combination for detecting Helicobacter pylori infection in patients with bleeding gastric ulcers,” Chinese Medical Journal, vol. 116, no. 12, pp. 1821–1826, 2003.View at: Google Scholar
W. K. Leung, J. J. Y. Sung, K. L. K. Siu, F. K. L. Chan, T. K. W. Ling, and A. F. B. Cheng, “False-negative biopsy urease test in bleeding ulcers caused by the buffering effects of blood,” The American Journal of Gastroenterology, vol. 93, no. 10, pp. 1914–1918, 1998.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
T.-C. Tu, C.-L. Lee, and C.-H. Wu, “False negative CLO test in bleeding ulcers can't be corrected by cleansing the implanted specimen,” Gut, vol. 45, supplement 5, p. A121, 1999.View at: Google Scholar
J. Houghton, R. Ramamoorthy, H. Pandya, R. Dhirmalani, and K. H. Kim, “Human plasma is directly bacteriocidal against Helicobacter pylori in vitro, potentially explaining the decreased detection of Helicobacter pylori during acute upper GI bleeding,” Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, vol. 55, no. 1, pp. 11–16, 2002.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
R. Colin, P. Czernichow, V. Baty et al., “Low sensitivity of invasive tests for the detection of Helicobacter pylori infection in patients with bleeding ulcer,” Gastroenterologie Clinique et Biologique, vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 31–35, 2000.View at: Google Scholar
I. K. Chung, S. J. Hong, E. J. Kim et al., “What is the best method to diagnose Helicobacter infection in bleeding peptic ulcers?: a prospective trial,” The Korean Journal of Internal Medicine, vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 147–152, 2001.View at: Google Scholar
D. Schilling, A. Demel, H. E. Adamek, T. Nüsse, E. Weidmann, and J. F. Riemann, “A negative rapid urease test is unreliable for exclusion of Helicobacter pylori infection during acute phase of ulcer bleeding. A prospective case control study,” Digestive and Liver Disease, vol. 35, no. 4, pp. 217–221, 2003.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
P. Griñó, S. Pascual, J. Such et al., “Comparison of stool immunoassay with standard methods for detection of Helicobacter pylori infection in patients with upper-gastrointestinal bleeding of peptic origin,” European Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, vol. 15, no. 5, pp. 525–529, 2003.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Güell, E. Artigau, V. Esteve, J. Sánchez-Delgado, F. Junquera, and X. Calvet, “Usefulness of a delayed test for the diagnosis of Helicobacter pylori infection in bleeding peptic ulcer,” Alimentary Pharmacology and Therapeutics, vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 53–59, 2006.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
H.-J. Lin, W.-C. Lo, C.-L. Perng, G.-Y. Tseng, A.-F. Li, and Y.-H. Ou, “Mucosal polymerase chain reaction for diagnosing Helicobacter pylori infection in patients with bleeding peptic ulcers,” World Journal of Gastroenterology, vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 382–385, 2005.View at: Google Scholar
C.-C. Lo, K.-H. Lai, N.-J. Peng et al., “Polymerase chain reaction: a sensitive method for detecting Helicobacter pylori infection in bleeding peptic ulcers,” World Journal of Gastroenterology, vol. 11, no. 25, pp. 3909–3914, 2005.View at: Google Scholar
J. Saez, S. Belda, M. Santibáñez et al., “Real-time PCR for diagnosing Helicobacter pylori infection in patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding: comparison with other classical diagnostic methods,” Journal of Clinical Microbiology, vol. 50, no. 10, pp. 3233–3237, 2012.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Winiarski, W. Bielanski, M. Plonka et al., “The usefulness of capsulated 13C-urea breath test in diagnosis of Helicobacter pylori infection in patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding,” Journal of Clinical Gastroenterology, vol. 37, no. 1, pp. 34–38, 2003.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. P. Gisbert, M. Trapero, X. Calvet et al., “Evaluation of three different tests for the detection of stool antigens to diagnose Helicobacter pylori infection in patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding,” Alimentary Pharmacology and Therapeutics, vol. 19, no. 8, pp. 923–929, 2004.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. E. van Leerdam, A. van der Ende, F. J. W. Ten Kate, E. A. J. Rauws, and G. N. J. Tytgat, “Lack of accuracy of the noninvasive Helicobacter pylori stool antigen test in patients with gastroduodenal ulcer bleeding,” The American Journal of Gastroenterology, vol. 98, no. 4, pp. 798–801, 2003.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
C. T. Loy, L. M. Irwig, P. H. Katelaris, and N. J. Talley, “Do commercial serological kits for Helicobacter pylori infection differ in accuracy? A meta-analysis,” The American Journal of Gastroenterology, vol. 91, no. 6, pp. 1138–1144, 1996.View at: Google Scholar
W.-M. Wang, C.-Y. Chen, C.-M. Jan et al., “Long-term follow-up and serological study after triple therapy of Helicobacter pylori-associated duodenal ulcer,” The American Journal of Gastroenterology, vol. 89, no. 10, pp. 1793–1796, 1994.View at: Google Scholar
A. K. Henriksson, A.-C. Edman, I. Nilsson, D. Bergqvist, and T. Wadström, “Helicobacter pylori and the relation to other risk factors in patients with acute bleeding peptic ulcer,” Scandinavian Journal of Gastroenterology, vol. 33, no. 10, pp. 1030–1033, 1998.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Udd, P. Miettinen, A. Palmu, and R. Julkunen, “Effect of short-term treatment with regular or high doses of omeprazole on the detection of Helicobacter pylori in bleeding peptic ulcer patients,” Scandinavian Journal of Gastroenterology, vol. 38, no. 6, pp. 588–593, 2003.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. J. Connor, M. C. Ngu, and P. H. Katelaris, “The impact of short-term ranitidine use on the precision of the 13C-urea breath test in subjects infected with Helicobacter pylori,” European Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, vol. 11, no. 10, pp. 1135–1138, 1999.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
K. Adachi, H. Fujishiro, T. Mihara, Y. Komazawa, and Y. Kinoshita, “Influence of lansoprazole, famotidine, roxatidine and rebamipide administration on the urea breath test for the diagnosis of Helicobacter pylori infection,” Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 168–171, 2003.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
D. Schilling, A. Demel, T. Nüsse, E. Weidmann, and J. F. Riemann, “Helicobacter pylori infection does not affect the early rebleeding rate in patients with peptic ulcer bleeding after successful endoscopic hemostasis: a prospective single-center trial,” Endoscopy, vol. 35, no. 5, pp. 393–396, 2003.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
E. Gené, J. Sanchez-Delgado, X. Calvet, J. P. Gisbert, and R. Azagra, “What is the best strategy for diagnosis and treatment of helicobacter pylori in the prevention of recurrent peptic ulcer bleeding? A cost-effectiveness analysis,” Value in Health, vol. 12, no. 5, pp. 759–762, 2009.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
C. Santander, R. G. Grávalos, A. Gómez-Cedenilla, J. Cantero, and J. M. Pajares, “Antimicrobial therapy for Helicobacter pylori infection versus long-term maintenance antisecretion treatment in the prevention of recurrent hemorrhage from peptic ulcer: prospective nonrandomized trial on 125 patients,” The American Journal of Gastroenterology, vol. 91, no. 8, pp. 1549–1552, 1996.View at: Google Scholar
M. M. Yousfi, H. M. T. El-Zimaity, M. T. Al-Assi, R. A. Cole, R. M. Genta, and D. Y. Graham, “Metronidazole, omeprazole and clarithromycin: an effective combination therapy for Helicobacter pylori infection,” Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 209–212, 1995.View at: Google Scholar
C. Lee, T. Tu, C. Wu et al., “One-week low-dose triple therapy is effective in treating Helicobacter pylori-infected patients with bleeding peptic ulcers,” Journal of the Formosan Medical Association, vol. 97, no. 11, pp. 733–737, 1998.View at: Google Scholar
P. E. T. Arkkila, K. Seppälä, T. U. Kosunen et al., “Eradication of Helicobacter pylori improves the healing rate and reduces the relapse rate of nonbleeding ulcers in patients with bleeding peptic ulcer,” The American Journal of Gastroenterology, vol. 98, no. 10, pp. 2149–2156, 2003.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. P. Gisbert, S. Khorrami, F. Carballo, X. Calvet, E. Gene, and E. Dominguez-Muñoz, “Meta-analysis: Helicobacter pylori eradication therapy vs. antisecretory non-eradication therapy for the prevention of recurrent bleeding from peptic ulcer,” Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics, vol. 19, no. 6, pp. 617–629, 2004.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
V. K. Sharma, A. V. Sahai, F. A. Corder, and C. W. Howden, “Helicobacter pylori eradication is superior to ulcer healing with or without maintenance therapy to prevent further ulcer haemorrhage,” Alimentary Pharmacology and Therapeutics, vol. 15, no. 12, pp. 1939–1947, 2001.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. Ofman, J. Wallace, E. Badamgarav, C.-F. Chiou, J. Henning, and L. Laine, “The cost-effectiveness of competing strategies for the prevention of recurrent peptic ulcer hemorrhage,” The American Journal of Gastroenterology, vol. 97, no. 8, pp. 1941–1950, 2002.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
C. C. Liu, C. L. Lee, C. C. Chan et al., “Maintenance treatment is not necessary after Helicobacter pylori eradication and healing of bleeding peptic ulcer a 5-year prospective, randomized, controlled study,” Archives of Internal Medicine, vol. 163, no. 17, pp. 2020–2024, 2003.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. P. Gisbert, S. Khorrami, F. Carballo, X. Calvet, E. Gené, and J. E. Dominguez-Muñoz, “H. pylori eradication therapy vs. antisecretory non-eradication therapy (with or without long-term maintenance antisecretory therapy) for the prevention of recurrent bleeding from peptic ulcer,” Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, no. 2, Article ID CD004062, 2004.View at: Google Scholar
A. Kikkawa, R. Iwakiri, H. Ootani et al., “Prevention of the rehaemorrhage of bleeding peptic ulcers: effects of Helicobacter pylori eradication and acid suppression,” Alimentary Pharmacology and Therapeutics, Supplement, vol. 21, supplement 2, pp. 79–84, 2005.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. Sreedharan, J. Martin, G. I. Leontiadis et al., “Proton pump inhibitor treatment initiated prior to endoscopic diagnosis in upper gastrointestinal bleeding (review),” Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, vol. 7, no. 7, Article ID CD005415, 2010.View at: Google Scholar
B.-S. Sheu, C.-H. Chi, C.-C. Huang, A.-W. Kao, Y.-L. Wang, and H.-B. Yang, “Impact of intravenous omeprazole on Helicobacter pylori eradication by triple therapy in patients with peptic ulcer bleeding,” Alimentary Pharmacology and Therapeutics, vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 137–143, 2002.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
D. Jaspersen, T. Korner, W. Schorr, M. Brennenstuhl, and C. Heinz-Hammar, “Omeprazole-amoxycillin therapy for eradication of Helicobacter pylori in duodenal ulcer bleeding: preliminary results of a pilot study,” Journal of Gastroenterology, vol. 30, no. 3, pp. 319–321, 1995.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
G. Macri, S. Milani, E. Surrenti, M. T. Passaleva, G. Salvadori, and C. Surrenti, “Eradication of Helicobacter pylori reduces the rate of duodenal ulcer rebleeding: a long-term follow-up study,” The American Journal of Gastroenterology, vol. 93, no. 6, pp. 925–927, 1998.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Amendola, R. Farias, J. Katz et al., “Absence of bleeding recurrence of peptic ulcer after long term follow-up of successful eradication of Helicobacter pylori,” Acta Gastroenterologica Latinoamericana, vol. 29, no. 2, pp. 47–50, 1999.View at: Google Scholar
J. P. Gisbert, D. Boixeda, R. Aller et al., “Helicobacter pylori and bleeding duodenal ulcer: Prevalence of the infection, efficacy of three triple therapies and role of eradication in the prevention of recurrent hemorrhage,” Medicina Clinica, vol. 112, no. 5, pp. 161–165, 1999.View at: Google Scholar
D. Horvat, A. Včev, I. Soldo et al., “The results of Helicobacter pylori eradication on repeated bleeding in patients with stomach ulcer,” Collegium Antropologicum, vol. 29, no. 1, pp. 139–142, 2005.View at: Google Scholar
L. A. Laine, J. Goldstein, J. Barkin, R. Hunt, S. Crowe, and D. Cave, “Helicobacter pylori and complicated ulcer disease,” The American Journal of Medicine, vol. 100, supplement 5, pp. 52S–59S, 1996.View at: Google Scholar
R. J. Hopkins, L. S. Girardi, and E. A. Turney, “Relationship pylori and reduced and ulcer recurrence: a review,” Gastroenterology, vol. 110, no. 4, pp. 1244–1252, 1996.View at: Google Scholar
C. Wu, M. Wu, C. Wang, J. Cheng, K. N. Kuo, and J. Lin, “A nationwide population-based cohort study shows reduced hospitalization for peptic ulcer disease associated with H pylori eradication and proton pump inhibitor use,” Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology, vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 427–431, 2009.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
H. Fujinami, T. Kudo, A. Hosokawsa et al., “A study of the changes in the cause of peptic ulcer bleeding,” World Journal of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, vol. 4, no. 7, pp. 323–327, 2012.View at: Google Scholar
D. Manuel, A. Cutler, J. Goldstein, M. B. Fennerty, and K. Brown, “Decreasing prevalence combined with increasing eradication of Helicobacter pylori infection in the United States has not resulted in fewer hospital admissions for peptic ulcer disease-related complications,” Alimentary Pharmacology and Therapeutics, vol. 25, no. 12, pp. 1423–1427, 2007.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar