Search

Objective: Rapid urease tests (RUTs) are used commonly as a convenient method to detect Helicobacter pylori infection. New rapid tests have been commercially available with promotional literature suggesting enhanced utility. We compared CLOtest to a new reagent strip RUT, PyloriTek., Methods: Gastric antral mucosal biopsy specimens were obtained from 102 patients for comparison between CLOtest and PyloriTek (204 specimens). Biopsy specimens obtained from a nearby area were stained using the Genta stain for determination of H. pylori status. The RUT to be used first was selected randomly., Results: Sixty-five of the 102 patients had peptic ulcer disease, two had gastric cancer, and 35 had dyspepsia; 61 patients had active H. pylori infection. There were one false-negative and three false-positive CLOtest results, compared with one false-negative and 13 false-positive PyloriTek results (p < 0.02 for incorrect categorization with PyloriTek). Sensitivity and specificity were 98 and 92% compared with 98 and 68% for CLOtest and PyloriTek, respectively. An erroneous categorization of H. pylori status occurred in 3.9% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1-9.7%) with CLOtest compared with 13.7% (95% CI: 7.7 -22%) with PyloriTek. When the PyloriTek was scored at 1 h (0-1 h) after obtaining the specimen, the accuracy improved; erroneous categorization of H. pylori status occurred in only 2.9% (95% CI: 0.6-8.3%)., Conclusion: Used according to manufacturer instructions, the new reagent strip RUT PyloriTek has too many false-positive results for use in a clinical situation. In contrast, when the test was interpreted within 1 h, accuracy was comparable to that of CLOtest.

Background: Rapid ureas tests (RUTs) provide a simple, sensitive method of detecting Helicobacter pylori infection., Objectives: Our aim, therefore, was to determine whether the yield of detecting H. pylori infection by RUT varied depending on the site of gastric biopsy., Materials and Methods: Gastric biopsies were obtained from 50 patients for RUT by use of hpfast (GI Supply, Camp Hill, PA). Biopsies were taken from the prepyloric greater curve antrum, from the gastric angle, and from the greater curve in mid-corpus. One biopsy specimen was placed in the RUT gel, and the biopsy from the adjacent mucosa was placed in formalin for subsequent histological evaluation by using the Genta stain. RUTs were examined and scored at intervals of 5, 10, 15, 30, and 45 minutes and after 1, 2, 4, and 24 hours., Results: Fifty patients were entered in the rest (150 RUTs), 32 having H. pylori infection. There were no false-positive RUTs (specificity, 100%). The gastric angle site was positive in 100%. The prepyloric site was positive in 87%, and the corpus site was positive in 84.4% (p < .052 for angle or prepyloric antrum versus corpus). The most common pattern was for all to be positive (74%). The median time to positivity was similar with angle and prepyloric sites (37.5 and 60 minutes, respectively, p = not significant) and shorter than the corpus biopsy (180 minutes); (p < .05 for angle or prepyloric antrum versus corpus)., Conclusion: The maximum probability for detecting H. pylori infection using a RUT is to obtain a biopsy from the gastric angle. To prevent missing a positive result when intestinal metaplasia is present, we recommend that (at a minimum) biopsies be taken from both the angle and the corpus.

Background: Rapid urease tests are commonly used as a convenient method to detect Helicobacter pylori infection. Our previous experiments demonstrated enhanced efficacy of agar gel rapid urease test compared with reagent strip rapid urease tests. We evaluated the efficacy of PyloriTek, a new reagent strip rapid test for detecting H. pylori infection., Methods: Gastric antral mucosal biopsy specimens were obtained for comparison between agar gel rapid urease tests and PyloriTek (200 specimens). The rapid urease test to be used first was selected randomly. H. pylori status was determined using the Genta stain. Culture was performed to confirm H. pylori status when false rapid urease tests were suspected., Results: One hundred patients were studied; 68 had H. pylori infection. There were two false-negative and one false-positive PyloriTek when scored at 1 hour, compared with only one false-positive and no false-negative tests at 2 hours. With the agar gel rapid urease tests, there were no false-positive tests and 5 false-negative tests when scored at 1 hour, 2 false-negative tests at 12 hours and 1 at 24 hours; there were no false-positive tests. At 1 hour, 3% (95% CI = 1% to 9%) of PyloriTek tests had an erroneous categorization of H. pylori status compared with 5% for the agar gel rapid urease tests (95% CI = 1.6% to 11%) (p > 0.7)., Conclusion: The new reagent strip rapid urease test, PyloriTek, is rapid and comparable in accuracy to agar gel rapid urease tests for detecting H. pylori Infection.

Background: The variables responsible for false-positive and false-negative rapid urease tests are largely unexplored., Objectives: We compared the results of rapid urease testing with jumbo cup forceps (3.3 mm diameter) and tiny cup forceps (1.8 mm diameter) with two rapid urease tests., Methods: Antral biopsies were obtained. The order of forceps and rapid urease tests was randomized. Biopsies were also taken for Genta staining., Results: One hundred and two patients were studied; 59 had Helicobacter pylori infection. There were 22 false-negative tests (8 CLOtest, 16 hpfast) and 5 false-positive tests (3 CLOtest, 2 hpfast). All 5 false-positive tests were among those positive only in the second 12 hours. There was no difference in results with the jumbo and tiny cup forceps. Five percent to nine percent (average, 6.6%; 95% confidence interval, 4.4% to 9.6%) of tests with any of the combinations gave an erroneous categorization of H. pylori status. There were no clinical or statistical differences in H. pylori categorizations by CLOtest or hpfast., Conclusion: The diagnostic yield for detecting H. pylori infection by rapid urease tests is not adversely affected by small biopsy size, possibly because tiny biopsies obtain superficial tissue where H. pylori reside.