Evaluation of invasive and non-invasive methods for the diagnosis of Helicobacter pylori infection in symptomatic children and adolescents

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Ogata,Silvio Kazuo
Data de Publicação: 2001
Outros Autores: Kawakami,Elisabete, Patrício,Francy Reis Silva, Pedroso,Margareth Zabeu, Santos,Antonio Mario
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: São Paulo medical journal (Online)
Texto Completo: http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1516-31802001000200006
Resumo: CONTEXT: Multiple diagnostic methods are available for the detection of Helicobacter pylori infection, but at present no single one can be used as the gold standard. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of 3 invasive and 2 non-invasive methods for detection of Helicobacter pylori infection in symptomatic children and adolescents. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study SETTING: Peptic Disease outpatients service, Discipline of Pediatric Gastroenterology, Universidade Federal de São Paulo / Escola Paulista de Medicina. PATIENTS: Forty-seven patients who underwent endoscopy because of dyspeptic symptoms. DIAGNOSTIC METHODS: Endoscopy with gastric biopsies for 3 invasive (rapid urease test, histology and culture) and 2 non-invasive methods (a commercial ELISA serology and 13carbon urea breath test - isotope ratio mass spectrometry) for detection of Helicobacter pylori infection. MAIN MEASUREMENTS: Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values of each method and agreement and disagreement rates between the methods. RESULTS: Forty-seven patients [mean age, 11y9mo (SD 2y10mo), 27 female and 20 male]; 62% of them were Helicobacter pylori-positive. All methods agreed in 61%, and were negative in 21% and positive in 40%. The greatest concordance between 2 methods occurred between the invasive methods: histology and rapid urease test (89.6%) and histology and culture (87.5%). The greatest sensitivity, considering Helicobacter pylori-positive cases, for any combination of 3 or more tests, was achieved by the rapid urease test (S=100%), followed by histology, serology and 13carbon-urea breath test (S=93.1%) and lastly by culture (S=79.3%). The highest specificity was obtained by histology (100%) and culture (100%), followed by the rapid urease test (84.2%), serology (78.9%) and 13carbon-urea breath test (78.9%). CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that among invasive methods, an association between the rapid urease test and histology constituted the best choice for the detection of Helicobacter pylori infection. If results of histology and the rapid urease test are different, serology may be recommended.
id APM-1_986abc5048e0c288c6388d2b10efae5e
oai_identifier_str oai:scielo:S1516-31802001000200006
network_acronym_str APM-1
network_name_str São Paulo medical journal (Online)
repository_id_str
spelling Evaluation of invasive and non-invasive methods for the diagnosis of Helicobacter pylori infection in symptomatic children and adolescentsChildren and adolescentsHelicobacter pyloriDiagnostic methodsCONTEXT: Multiple diagnostic methods are available for the detection of Helicobacter pylori infection, but at present no single one can be used as the gold standard. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of 3 invasive and 2 non-invasive methods for detection of Helicobacter pylori infection in symptomatic children and adolescents. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study SETTING: Peptic Disease outpatients service, Discipline of Pediatric Gastroenterology, Universidade Federal de São Paulo / Escola Paulista de Medicina. PATIENTS: Forty-seven patients who underwent endoscopy because of dyspeptic symptoms. DIAGNOSTIC METHODS: Endoscopy with gastric biopsies for 3 invasive (rapid urease test, histology and culture) and 2 non-invasive methods (a commercial ELISA serology and 13carbon urea breath test - isotope ratio mass spectrometry) for detection of Helicobacter pylori infection. MAIN MEASUREMENTS: Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values of each method and agreement and disagreement rates between the methods. RESULTS: Forty-seven patients [mean age, 11y9mo (SD 2y10mo), 27 female and 20 male]; 62% of them were Helicobacter pylori-positive. All methods agreed in 61%, and were negative in 21% and positive in 40%. The greatest concordance between 2 methods occurred between the invasive methods: histology and rapid urease test (89.6%) and histology and culture (87.5%). The greatest sensitivity, considering Helicobacter pylori-positive cases, for any combination of 3 or more tests, was achieved by the rapid urease test (S=100%), followed by histology, serology and 13carbon-urea breath test (S=93.1%) and lastly by culture (S=79.3%). The highest specificity was obtained by histology (100%) and culture (100%), followed by the rapid urease test (84.2%), serology (78.9%) and 13carbon-urea breath test (78.9%). CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that among invasive methods, an association between the rapid urease test and histology constituted the best choice for the detection of Helicobacter pylori infection. If results of histology and the rapid urease test are different, serology may be recommended.Associação Paulista de Medicina - APM2001-03-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1516-31802001000200006Sao Paulo Medical Journal v.119 n.2 2001reponame:São Paulo medical journal (Online)instname:Associação Paulista de Medicinainstacron:APM10.1590/S1516-31802001000200006info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessOgata,Silvio KazuoKawakami,ElisabetePatrício,Francy Reis SilvaPedroso,Margareth ZabeuSantos,Antonio Marioeng2001-03-19T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S1516-31802001000200006Revistahttp://www.scielo.br/spmjhttps://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.phprevistas@apm.org.br1806-94601516-3180opendoar:2001-03-19T00:00São Paulo medical journal (Online) - Associação Paulista de Medicinafalse
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Evaluation of invasive and non-invasive methods for the diagnosis of Helicobacter pylori infection in symptomatic children and adolescents
title Evaluation of invasive and non-invasive methods for the diagnosis of Helicobacter pylori infection in symptomatic children and adolescents
spellingShingle Evaluation of invasive and non-invasive methods for the diagnosis of Helicobacter pylori infection in symptomatic children and adolescents
Ogata,Silvio Kazuo
Children and adolescents
Helicobacter pylori
Diagnostic methods
title_short Evaluation of invasive and non-invasive methods for the diagnosis of Helicobacter pylori infection in symptomatic children and adolescents
title_full Evaluation of invasive and non-invasive methods for the diagnosis of Helicobacter pylori infection in symptomatic children and adolescents
title_fullStr Evaluation of invasive and non-invasive methods for the diagnosis of Helicobacter pylori infection in symptomatic children and adolescents
title_full_unstemmed Evaluation of invasive and non-invasive methods for the diagnosis of Helicobacter pylori infection in symptomatic children and adolescents
title_sort Evaluation of invasive and non-invasive methods for the diagnosis of Helicobacter pylori infection in symptomatic children and adolescents
author Ogata,Silvio Kazuo
author_facet Ogata,Silvio Kazuo
Kawakami,Elisabete
Patrício,Francy Reis Silva
Pedroso,Margareth Zabeu
Santos,Antonio Mario
author_role author
author2 Kawakami,Elisabete
Patrício,Francy Reis Silva
Pedroso,Margareth Zabeu
Santos,Antonio Mario
author2_role author
author
author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Ogata,Silvio Kazuo
Kawakami,Elisabete
Patrício,Francy Reis Silva
Pedroso,Margareth Zabeu
Santos,Antonio Mario
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Children and adolescents
Helicobacter pylori
Diagnostic methods
topic Children and adolescents
Helicobacter pylori
Diagnostic methods
description CONTEXT: Multiple diagnostic methods are available for the detection of Helicobacter pylori infection, but at present no single one can be used as the gold standard. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of 3 invasive and 2 non-invasive methods for detection of Helicobacter pylori infection in symptomatic children and adolescents. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study SETTING: Peptic Disease outpatients service, Discipline of Pediatric Gastroenterology, Universidade Federal de São Paulo / Escola Paulista de Medicina. PATIENTS: Forty-seven patients who underwent endoscopy because of dyspeptic symptoms. DIAGNOSTIC METHODS: Endoscopy with gastric biopsies for 3 invasive (rapid urease test, histology and culture) and 2 non-invasive methods (a commercial ELISA serology and 13carbon urea breath test - isotope ratio mass spectrometry) for detection of Helicobacter pylori infection. MAIN MEASUREMENTS: Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values of each method and agreement and disagreement rates between the methods. RESULTS: Forty-seven patients [mean age, 11y9mo (SD 2y10mo), 27 female and 20 male]; 62% of them were Helicobacter pylori-positive. All methods agreed in 61%, and were negative in 21% and positive in 40%. The greatest concordance between 2 methods occurred between the invasive methods: histology and rapid urease test (89.6%) and histology and culture (87.5%). The greatest sensitivity, considering Helicobacter pylori-positive cases, for any combination of 3 or more tests, was achieved by the rapid urease test (S=100%), followed by histology, serology and 13carbon-urea breath test (S=93.1%) and lastly by culture (S=79.3%). The highest specificity was obtained by histology (100%) and culture (100%), followed by the rapid urease test (84.2%), serology (78.9%) and 13carbon-urea breath test (78.9%). CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that among invasive methods, an association between the rapid urease test and histology constituted the best choice for the detection of Helicobacter pylori infection. If results of histology and the rapid urease test are different, serology may be recommended.
publishDate 2001
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2001-03-01
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1516-31802001000200006
url http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1516-31802001000200006
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv 10.1590/S1516-31802001000200006
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv text/html
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Associação Paulista de Medicina - APM
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Associação Paulista de Medicina - APM
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Sao Paulo Medical Journal v.119 n.2 2001
reponame:São Paulo medical journal (Online)
instname:Associação Paulista de Medicina
instacron:APM
instname_str Associação Paulista de Medicina
instacron_str APM
institution APM
reponame_str São Paulo medical journal (Online)
collection São Paulo medical journal (Online)
repository.name.fl_str_mv São Paulo medical journal (Online) - Associação Paulista de Medicina
repository.mail.fl_str_mv revistas@apm.org.br
_version_ 1754209260359647232