Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2009;44(9):944-51.
doi: 10.1007/s00535-009-0097-8. Epub 2009 Jun 24.

Use of the lactose-[13C]ureide breath test for diagnosis of small bowel bacterial overgrowth: comparison to the glucose hydrogen breath test

Affiliations
Comparative Study

Use of the lactose-[13C]ureide breath test for diagnosis of small bowel bacterial overgrowth: comparison to the glucose hydrogen breath test

Heiner K Berthold et al. J Gastroenterol. 2009.

Abstract

Purpose: The glucose hydrogen breath test (GHBT) is commonly used as a noninvasive test to diagnose small bowel bacterial overgrowth (SBBO) but its validity has been questioned. Our aim was to evaluate the lactose-[(13)C]ureide breath test (LUBT) to diagnose SBBO and to compare it with the GHBT, using cultures of intestinal aspirates as a gold standard.

Methods: In 22 patients with suspected SBBO (14 male, age range 18-73 years) aspirates were taken from the region of the ligament of Treitz under sterile conditions and cultured for bacterial growth. More than 10(6) colony-forming units/mL fluid or the presence of colonic flora was defined as culture positive (c+). After oral intake of 50 g glucose and 2 g of lactose-[(13)C]ureide, end-expiratory breath samples were obtained up to 120 min. The (13)C/(12)C ratio in breath CO(2) was determined by isotope ratio-mass spectrometry and hydrogen concentration in breath was analyzed electrochemically.

Results: After analyzing receiver operating characteristic curves of the LUBT results, total label recovery of >0.88% at 120 min was considered positive. The test had a sensitivity of 66.7% and a specificity of 100% to predict c+. In the GHBT, an increase of the signal of > or =12 ppm from baseline was considered positive. The sensitivity and specificity of the test were 41.7 and 44.4%, respectively.

Conclusions: The new stable isotope-labeled LUBT has excellent specificity but suboptimal sensitivity. In contrast, the standard GHBT lacks both high sensitivity and specificity. The LUBT is superior to the GHBT for detecting SBBO.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Gastroenterology. 1983 Jan;84(1):26-9 - PubMed
    1. Eur J Clin Invest. 2006 Oct;36(10):737-42 - PubMed
    1. Curr Gastroenterol Rep. 2007 Dec;9(6):463-7 - PubMed
    1. Br J Nutr. 1982 Sep;48(2):305-18 - PubMed
    1. Geriatrics. 2006 Sep;61(9):21-6 - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources