A prospective study on Helicobacter pylori rapid urease test false negativity: is it time for its use in restricted situations?

IF 3 4区 医学 Q3 Medicine
Minerva gastroenterology Pub Date : 2023-09-01 Epub Date: 2022-06-15 DOI:10.23736/S2724-5985.22.03207-7
Giuseppe Losurdo, Federica Francioso, Maria Pricci, Bruna Girardi, Francesco Russo, Giuseppe Riezzo, Benedetta D'Attoma, Maria A Bleve, Andrea Iannone, Francesca Celiberto, Enzo Ierardi, Alfredo DI Leo
{"title":"A prospective study on Helicobacter pylori rapid urease test false negativity: is it time for its use in restricted situations?","authors":"Giuseppe Losurdo, Federica Francioso, Maria Pricci, Bruna Girardi, Francesco Russo, Giuseppe Riezzo, Benedetta D'Attoma, Maria A Bleve, Andrea Iannone, Francesca Celiberto, Enzo Ierardi, Alfredo DI Leo","doi":"10.23736/S2724-5985.22.03207-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Rapid urease test (RUT) is a diagnostic tool for Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) diagnosis, based on the ability of the bacterium to produce urease. Despite it is considered simple, fast, and cheap, some conditions may cause false negativity. Therefore, the aim of this study was to compare RUT with currently recommended tests for H. pylori diagnosis.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We enrolled consecutive patients who underwent upper endoscopy with histology, RUT, and urea breath test (UBT). Delta over baseline (DOB) >4% was considered positive for UBT. Diagnosis of infection was achieved when at least two tests were positive. The rate of false positivity of RUT was computed, and DOB value in RUT+ versus RUT- was compared by Mann-Whitney Test.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>One hundred and sixteen consecutive patients with H. pylori infection were recruited. The male/female ratio was 35/81 and the mean age 45.2±13.1. Twenty-five patients (21.5%) were RUT-, despite being positive at both histology and UBT. On the other hand, in only two patients UBT and histology had discordant results. A full concordance of the three tests was observed in 89 patients (76.7%). DOB, additionally, was significantly higher in RUT+ patients (39.2±24.2%) than RUT- ones (26.3±18.5%; P=0.005).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>RUT shows false negativity rate higher than 20%. Moreover, the RUT-negative patients showed a lower DOB at UBT, which is an indirect indicator of intragastric bacterial load. Therefore, it is presumable that H. pylori low amount may be a concurrent cause of false negativity. This study suggests that RUT-based H. pylori detection should be restricted to some specific conditions.</p>","PeriodicalId":18653,"journal":{"name":"Minerva gastroenterology","volume":"69 3","pages":"382-387"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Minerva gastroenterology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.23736/S2724-5985.22.03207-7","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/6/15 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Rapid urease test (RUT) is a diagnostic tool for Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) diagnosis, based on the ability of the bacterium to produce urease. Despite it is considered simple, fast, and cheap, some conditions may cause false negativity. Therefore, the aim of this study was to compare RUT with currently recommended tests for H. pylori diagnosis.

Methods: We enrolled consecutive patients who underwent upper endoscopy with histology, RUT, and urea breath test (UBT). Delta over baseline (DOB) >4% was considered positive for UBT. Diagnosis of infection was achieved when at least two tests were positive. The rate of false positivity of RUT was computed, and DOB value in RUT+ versus RUT- was compared by Mann-Whitney Test.

Results: One hundred and sixteen consecutive patients with H. pylori infection were recruited. The male/female ratio was 35/81 and the mean age 45.2±13.1. Twenty-five patients (21.5%) were RUT-, despite being positive at both histology and UBT. On the other hand, in only two patients UBT and histology had discordant results. A full concordance of the three tests was observed in 89 patients (76.7%). DOB, additionally, was significantly higher in RUT+ patients (39.2±24.2%) than RUT- ones (26.3±18.5%; P=0.005).

Conclusions: RUT shows false negativity rate higher than 20%. Moreover, the RUT-negative patients showed a lower DOB at UBT, which is an indirect indicator of intragastric bacterial load. Therefore, it is presumable that H. pylori low amount may be a concurrent cause of false negativity. This study suggests that RUT-based H. pylori detection should be restricted to some specific conditions.

幽门螺旋杆菌尿素酶快速检测假阴性的前瞻性研究:是否到了限制使用的时候?
背景:快速尿素酶试验(RUT)是一种诊断幽门螺旋杆菌(H. pylori)的工具,它基于幽门螺旋杆菌产生尿素酶的能力。尽管它被认为简单、快速、便宜,但在某些情况下可能会导致假阴性。因此,本研究旨在比较 RUT 和目前推荐的幽门螺杆菌诊断测试:我们连续招募了接受上内镜检查和组织学检查、RUT 和尿素呼气试验(UT)的患者。尿素呼气试验(UT)的基线德尔塔值(DOB)>4%为阳性。如果至少有两项检测呈阳性,则可诊断为感染。计算 RUT 的假阳性率,并通过 Mann-Whitney 检验比较 RUT+ 与 RUT- 的 DOB 值:结果:共招募了 116 名幽门螺杆菌感染患者。男女比例为 35/81 ,平均年龄(45.2±13.1)岁。有 25 名患者(21.5%)的组织学和 UBT 结果均为阳性,但 RUT 为阴性。另一方面,只有两名患者的 UBT 和组织学检查结果不一致。89名患者(76.7%)的三种检测结果完全一致。此外,RUT+患者的DOB(39.2±24.2%)明显高于RUT-患者(26.3±18.5%;P=0.005):结论:RUT的假阴性率高于20%。此外,RUT 阴性患者的 UBT DOB 值较低,而这是胃内细菌量的间接指标。因此,可以推测幽门螺杆菌数量少可能是造成假阴性的并发原因。这项研究表明,基于 RUT 的幽门螺杆菌检测应仅限于某些特殊情况。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Minerva gastroenterology
Minerva gastroenterology GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY-
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
13.30%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信