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
. 1998 Oct;10(10):843-6.
doi: 10.1097/00042737-199810000-00005.

Screening dyspeptic patients for Helicobacter pylori prior to endoscopy: laboratory or near-patient testing?

Affiliations
Comparative Study

Screening dyspeptic patients for Helicobacter pylori prior to endoscopy: laboratory or near-patient testing?

M A Asante et al. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 1998 Oct.

Abstract

Background: It is unclear whether near-patient whole-blood diagnostic tests for Helicobacter pylori are of comparable accuracy to laboratory based ELISA for screening of dyspeptic patients prior to endoscopy.

Aim: To compare two ELISA and two whole-blood tests in order to determine whether near-patient H. pylori diagnostic tests are an acceptable alternative to laboratory based ELISA tests for screening of dyspeptic patients prior to endoscopy.

Method: One hundred and seven consecutive patients with dyspepsia (median age, 32 years; range, 16-45 years) were evaluated with Helico-G ELISA, Hmcap ELISA and Helisal whole-blood tests. A further 111 dyspeptic patients (median age, 51 years; range, 16-96 years) were evaluated with the Immunocard whole-blood test only. The 'gold standard' for infection was based on histology and the rapid urease test (CLO).

Results: Compared to the Helico-G test, both near-patient tests had a higher false negative rate (23-37% vs 5%, P< 0.003), and lower sensitivity and negative predictive value. The Immunocard had a higher specificity than did the Helisal (87% vs 63%, P=0.006); otherwise both near-patient whole-blood tests had similar performance. At a sensitivity of 95%, the Hmcap ELISA was more specific than the Helico-G ELISA (75% vs 67%) and had fewer false positives (25% vs 32%). The near-patient tests would wrongly classify up to 40% H. pylori positive dyspeptic patients and exclude them from endoscopy, compared to 5-6% for ELISA.

Conclusions: Near-patient whole-blood H. pylori diagnostic tests are less accurate and thus not an acceptable alternative to laboratory based ELISA tests.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources