Evaluation of invasive and non-invasive methods for the diagnosis of Helicobacter pylori infection in symptomatic children and adolescents
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2001 |
Outros Autores: | , , , |
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 |