Search

Objectives: Immunochromatographic tests need to be improved in order to enhance their reliability. Recently, several new kits have appeared on the market. The objective was to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of three monoclonal rapid stool tests - the new Uni-Gold™ H.pylori Antigen (Trinity Biotech, Ireland), the RAPID Hp StAR (Oxoid Ltd., UK) and the ImmunoCard STAT! HpSA (Meridian Diagnostics, USA) - for detecting H. pylori infection prior to eradication treatment., Design and Methods: Diagnostic accuracy (sensitivity and specificity) and reliability (concordance between observers) were evaluated in 250 untreated consecutive dyspeptic patients. The gold standard for diagnosing H. pylori infection was defined as the concordance of two or more of rapid urease test (RUT), histopathology and urease breath test (UBT) or positive culture in isolation. Readings of immunochromatographic tests were performed by two different observers. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values and 95% confidence intervals were calculated. Sensitivity and specificity were compared using the McNemar test., Results: The three tests showed a good correlation, with Kappa values>0.9. RAPID Hp StAR had a sensitivity of 91%-92% and a specificity ranging from 77% to 85%. Its sensitivity was higher than that of Uni-Gold™ H.pylori Antigen and ImmunoCard STAT! HpSA (p<0.01). Uni-Gold™ H.pylori Antigen kit showed a sensitivity of 83%, similar to ImmunoCard STAT! HpSA. Specificity of Uni-Gold™ H.pylori Antigen approached 90% (87-89%) and was superior to that of RAPID Hp StAR (p<0.01)., Conclusions: Uni-Gold™ H.pylori Antigen and ImmunoCard STAT! HpSA present similar levels of diagnostic accuracy. RAPID Hp StAR was the most sensitive but less reliable of the three immunochromatographic stool tests. None are as accurate and reliable as UBT, RUT and histology., (Copyright © 2016 The Canadian Society of Clinical Chemists. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: It has been suggested that prevalence of Helicobacter pylori (Hp) in peptic ulcer bleeding (PUB) is lower than that in non-complicated ulcers. As Hp infection is elusive in PUB, we hypothesized that this low prevalence could be related to an insufficiently intensive search for the bacteria. The aim of the study was to evaluate whether the prevalence of Hp in PUB depends on the diagnostic methods used in a given study., Methods: A systematic review was performed of studies assessing the prevalence of Hp infection in patients with PUB. Data were extracted in duplicate. Univariate and multivariate random-effects meta-regression analyses were performed to determine the factors that explained the differences in Hp prevalence between studies., Results: The review retrieved 71 articles, including 8,496 patients. The mean prevalence of Hp infection in PUB was 72%. The meta-regression analysis showed that the most significant variables associated with a high prevalence of Hp infection were the use of a diagnostic test delayed until at least 4 weeks after the PUB episode-odds ratio: 2.08, 95% confidence interval: 1.10-3.93, P=0.024-and a lower mean age of patients-odds ratio: 0.95 per additional year, 95% confidence interval: 0.92-0.99, P=0.008., Conclusions: Studies that performed a delayed test and those including younger patients found a higher prevalence of Hp, approaching that recorded in cases of non-bleeding ulcers. These results suggest that the low prevalence of Hp infection described in PUB may be related to the methodology of the studies and to patients' characteristics, and that the true prevalence of Hp in PUB is still to be determined. Our data also support the recent recommendations of the International Consensus on Non-Variceal Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding regarding the performance of a delayed diagnostic test when Hp tests carried out during the acute PUB episode are negative.

Background: Despite many changes, no large studies comparing the different diagnostic tests for Helicobacter pylori have been performed in the past 10 years. In this time, monoclonal stool antigen immunoassays and in-office 13C-urea breath tests (UBTs) have appeared. The aim of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of invasive and noninvasive tests in a large series of dyspeptic patients., Methods: A total of 199 dyspeptic patients who had not previously been treated for H. pylori infection were prospectively enrolled. Noninvasive analyses included a commercial infrared-based UBT and a commercially available stool test. Biopsy-based tests included histological examination and a rapid urease test. A patient was considered to be infected when at least 2 test results were positive. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and 95% confidence intervals were calculated. The test results were compared using the McNemar test., Results: Rates of positive test results were similar (54%) for the rapid urease test, histopathological examination, and the stool test. By contrast, 75% of UBT results were positive, and the UBT was associated with a very low specificity (60%). For this reason, the delta cutoff value for the UBT was recalculated as 8.5%. Sensitivities and specificities with this new cutoff value were 95% and 100%, respectively, for the rapid urease test; 94% and 99%, respectively, for histopathological examination; 90% and 93%, respectively, for the stool test; and 90% and 90%, respectively, for the UBT., Conclusions: Histological examination and rapid urease testing showed excellent diagnostic reliability. The stool test seems to be a good, noninvasive alternative to endoscopy-based tests. By contrast, the infrared-based UBT evaluated in our study showed a lower than expected performance, which was partially corrected when the cutoff value for the test was recalculated.

Background: To date, the search for an in-office reliable test for Helicobacter pylori infection has been unsuccessful. The aim of the present study was to evaluate a new immunocromatographic in-office test using monoclonal antibodies to determine the presence of Helicobacter pylori antigen in faeces (Stick H. pyl, Operon S.A. Zaragoza). We compared its reliability and reproducibility to the currently available test (HpSA, EIA, Premier Platinum HpSA, Meridian Diagnosis Inc, Cincinnati, Ohio)., Patients and Method: 71 consecutive dyspeptic patients were enrolled. Helicobacter pylori status was determined by rapid urease test and Giemsa stain of antral biopsy. Patients with a positive result in the two tests were considered as infected and those with a negative result in both tests were regarded as not infected. Faecal Helicobacter pylori antigen was tested twice by means of HpSA. Four consecutive determinations of Stick H. pyl were also performed. We calculated sensitivity, specificity and positive and negative predictive values of each determination. Concordance between determinations was estimated by the kappa statistics., Results: Forty-eight of 68 patients were infected by Helicobacter pylori. Sensitivity, specificity and positive and negative predictive values were 89-96%, 60-70% 85-88% and 74-87%, respectively, for Stick H. pyl and 70-75%, 60-85%, 85-92% and 55-80%, respectively, for HpSA. Correlation coefficients were 0.82-0.93 for Stick H. pyl and 0.57 for HpSA., Conclusions: The new Stick H. pyl test shows excellent sensitivity and reproducibility for diagnosis of H. pylori infection. Its reliability appears to be far better than that of HpSA.