OBJECTIVES: To compare the accuracy of the breath test using the isotope ratio mass spectrometer (IRMS) versus the nondispersive isotope-selective infrared spectrometer (NDIRS) in the diagnosis of Helicobacter pylori infection. METHOD: Multicenter study in 4 Spanish hospitals. One group of dyspeptic patients who had not undergone prior eradication therapy and another group of patients with gastric ulcer or gastrointestinal bleeding due to gastroduodenal ulcer receiving H. pylori eradication therapy were included in the study. A reference standard based on histology and the rapid urease test was used. The breast test (TAU-KIT, Isomed S.L., Madrid, Spain) was performed with citric acid and 100 mg of 13C-urea. Samples of expired air were collected in tubes and bags for reading with the IRMS (ABCA, PDZ, Crewe, Manchester, England) and the NDIRS (UBiT-IR200, Otsuka Electronics, Co, Osaka, Japan), respectively. The endoscopist, pathologist and person responsible for reading the urease test and both breath tests were blinded to the results of the other diagnostic methods. RESULTS:Forty-one patients were included. The prevalence of H. pylori was 26%. No differences were found on comparing the mean values obtained with the IRMS and the NDIRS: 13 (standard deviation) (24) and 14 (25) delta units, respectively. The area under the ROC curve for the IRMS and the NDIRS was 0.96. The diagnostic accuracy for the best cut-off point with the IRMS and the NDIRS was, respectively: sensitivity (90 and 100%), specificity (96 and 89%), positive predictive value (90 and 77%), negative predictive value (96 and 100%), + likelihaod ratio (25 and 9.3) and (0.1 and 0). A close correlation was found between the values of the IRMS and those of the NDIRS (lineal regression equation, Y = 1.1 + 1.004. X; r = 0.97). CONCLUSION: Both the spectrometers used to evaluate the breath test, the IRMS and the NDIRS, offer a high degree of accuracy in the diagnosis of H. pylori infection.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVES: To compare the accuracy of the breath test using the isotope ratio mass spectrometer (IRMS) versus the nondispersive isotope-selective infrared spectrometer (NDIRS) in the diagnosis of Helicobacter pylori infection. METHOD: Multicenter study in 4 Spanish hospitals. One group of dyspeptic patients who had not undergone prior eradication therapy and another group of patients with gastric ulcer or gastrointestinal bleeding due to gastroduodenal ulcer receiving H. pylori eradication therapy were included in the study. A reference standard based on histology and the rapid urease test was used. The breast test (TAU-KIT, Isomed S.L., Madrid, Spain) was performed with citric acid and 100 mg of 13C-urea. Samples of expired air were collected in tubes and bags for reading with the IRMS (ABCA, PDZ, Crewe, Manchester, England) and the NDIRS (UBiT-IR200, Otsuka Electronics, Co, Osaka, Japan), respectively. The endoscopist, pathologist and person responsible for reading the urease test and both breath tests were blinded to the results of the other diagnostic methods. RESULTS: Forty-one patients were included. The prevalence of H. pylori was 26%. No differences were found on comparing the mean values obtained with the IRMS and the NDIRS: 13 (standard deviation) (24) and 14 (25) delta units, respectively. The area under the ROC curve for the IRMS and the NDIRS was 0.96. The diagnostic accuracy for the best cut-off point with the IRMS and the NDIRS was, respectively: sensitivity (90 and 100%), specificity (96 and 89%), positive predictive value (90 and 77%), negative predictive value (96 and 100%), + likelihaod ratio (25 and 9.3) and (0.1 and 0). A close correlation was found between the values of the IRMS and those of the NDIRS (lineal regression equation, Y = 1.1 + 1.004. X; r = 0.97). CONCLUSION: Both the spectrometers used to evaluate the breath test, the IRMS and the NDIRS, offer a high degree of accuracy in the diagnosis of H. pyloriinfection.
Authors: Brian D Nicholson; Lucy M Abel; Philip J Turner; Christopher P Price; Carl Heneghan; Gail Hayward; Annette Plüddemann Journal: Br J Gen Pract Date: 2017-12 Impact factor: 5.386
Authors: Elena Resina; María G Donday; Samuel J Martínez-Domínguez; Emilio José Laserna-Mendieta; Ángel Lanas; Alfredo J Lucendo; Marta Sánchez-Luengo; Noelia Alcaide; Luis Fernández-Salazar; Luisa De La Peña-Negro; Luis Bujanda; Marta Gómez-Ruiz de Arbulo; Javier Alcedo; Ángeles Pérez-Aísa; Raúl Rodríguez; Sandra Hermida; Yanire Brenes; Olga P Nyssen; Javier P Gisbert Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2022-08-29 Impact factor: 4.964
Authors: Jutta Keller; Heinz F Hammer; Paul R Afolabi; Marc Benninga; Osvaldo Borrelli; Enrique Dominguez-Munoz; Dan Dumitrascu; Oliver Goetze; Stephan L Haas; Bruno Hauser; Daniel Pohl; Silvia Salvatore; Marc Sonyi; Nikhil Thapar; Kristin Verbeke; Mark R Fox Journal: United European Gastroenterol J Date: 2021-06-14 Impact factor: 4.623
Authors: José M Navarro-Jarabo; Nuria Fernández; Francisca L Sousa; Encarnación Cabrera; Manuel Castro; Luz M Ramírez; Robin Rivera; Esther Ubiña; Francisco Vera; Isabel Méndez; Francisco Rivas-Ruiz; José L Moreno; Emilio Perea-Milla Journal: BMC Gastroenterol Date: 2007-07-25 Impact factor: 3.067