Prospective comparison of commercially available rapid urease tests for the diagnosis of Helicobacter pylori

被引:97
作者
Laine, L
Lewin, D
Naritoku, W
Estrada, R
Cohen, H
机构
[1] GI Division (LAC 12-137), U.S.C. School of Medicine, Los Angeles, CA 90033
关键词
D O I
10.1016/S0016-5107(96)70002-0
中图分类号
R57 [消化系及腹部疾病];
学科分类号
摘要
Background: Rapid urease testing is the initial endoscopic test of choice for the diagnosis of Helicobacter pylori. Determination of the relative diagnostic yields and times to a positive test for the different rapid urease tests is important for endoscopists. We compared three commercially available tests using histologic examination and culture as a gold standard. Methods: Patients undergoing upper endoscopy had six biopsy specimens taken from the antrum and six from the body with a large-channel biopsy forceps. Each set of six specimens was divided as follows: one each for CLOtest, Hpfast, and Pyloritek rapid urease tests; one for culture; and two for histologic examination (H&E, Genta). All tests were read every 15 minutes for 1 hour; the final reading for Pyloritek was at 1 hour. CLOtest and Hpfast were also read at 4 hours and 24 hours. Results: One hundred seventy-th ree sets of biopsy specimens from 87 patients were evaluated; 98 (57%) of the 173 sets were positive for ii. pylori by histologic examination and/or culture. The mean and median times to a positive test were significantly less for Pyloritek (0.5 +/-: 0.02 hour and 0.5 hour) than for CLOtest (2.0 +/- 0.6 hour and 0.75 hour) or Hpfast (2.2 +/- 0.6 hour and 0.5 hour). The sensitivities at the final readings were similar among the three tests (CLOtest: 93%; Hpfast: 88%; Pyloritek: 89%), but sensitivities at 1 hour were significantly better for Pyloritek (89%) than for CLOtest (71%) or Hpfast (66%). At 4 hours, sensitivities for CLOtest and Hpfast improved significantly and were not significantly different from those of Pyloritek. Specificities were 99% to 100% at all times for all three tests. Conclusion: The three rapid urease tests, CLOtest, Hpfast, and Pyloritek, provide comparable results, with sensitivities around 90% and specificities around 100%. The Pyloritek becomes positive more rapidly than the CLOtest or Hpfast. If a reading is desired within 1 hour, the Pyloritek provides a greater sensitivity than the CLOtest or Hpfast without any sacrifice in specificity.
引用
收藏
页码:523 / 526
页数:4
相关论文
共 5 条
  • [1] COHEN G, 1995, AM J GASTROENTEROL, V90, P1579
  • [2] The influence of size or number of biopsies on rapid urease test results: A prospective evaluation
    Laine, L
    Chun, D
    Stein, C
    ElBeblawi, I
    Sharma, V
    Chandrasoma, P
    [J]. GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY, 1996, 43 (01) : 49 - 53
  • [3] The influence of warming on rapid urease test results: A prospective evaluation
    Laine, L
    Estrada, R
    Lewin, DN
    Cohen, H
    [J]. GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY, 1996, 44 (04) : 429 - 432
  • [4] YOUNG EL, 1995, GASTROENTEROLOGY, V108, pA265
  • [5] Yousfi MM, 1996, GASTROINTEST ENDOSC, V43, P222