Consideraciones prácticas para el diagnóstico de la infección por Helicobacter pylori

Non-invasive diagnostic tests for Helicobacter pylori infection

BACKGROUND

Helicobacter pylori (H pylori) infection has been implicated in a number of malignancies and non-malignant conditions including peptic ulcers, non-ulcer dyspepsia, recurrent peptic ulcer bleeding, unexplained iron deficiency anaemia, idiopathic thrombocytopaenia purpura, and colorectal adenomas. The confirmatory diagnosis of H pylori is by endoscopic biopsy, followed by histopathological examination using haemotoxylin and eosin (H & E) stain or special stains such as Giemsa stain and Warthin-Starry stain. Special stains are more accurate than H & E stain. There is significant uncertainty about the diagnostic accuracy of non-invasive tests for diagnosis of H pylori.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the diagnostic accuracy of urea breath test, serology, and stool antigen test, used alone or in combination, for diagnosis of H pylori infection in symptomatic and asymptomatic people, so that eradication therapy for H pylori can be started.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, the Science Citation Index and the National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment Database on 4 March 2016. We screened references in the included studies to identify additional studies. We also conducted citation searches of relevant studies, most recently on 4 December 2016. We did not restrict studies by language or publication status, or whether data were collected prospectively or retrospectively.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included diagnostic accuracy studies that evaluated at least one of the index tests (urea breath test using isotopes such as 13C or 14C, serology and stool antigen test) against the reference standard (histopathological examination using H & E stain, special stains or immunohistochemical stain) in people suspected of having H pylori infection.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened the references to identify relevant studies and independently extracted data. We assessed the methodological quality of studies using the QUADAS-2 tool. We performed meta-analysis by using the hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic (HSROC) model to estimate and compare SROC curves. Where appropriate, we used bivariate or univariate logistic regression models to estimate summary sensitivities and specificities.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 101 studies involving 11,003 participants, of which 5839 participants (53.1%) had H pylori infection. The prevalence of H pylori infection in the studies ranged from 15.2% to 94.7%, with a median prevalence of 53.7% (interquartile range 42.0% to 66.5%). Most of the studies (57%) included participants with dyspepsia and 53 studies excluded participants who recently had proton pump inhibitors or antibiotics.There was at least an unclear risk of bias or unclear applicability concern for each study.Of the 101 studies, 15 compared the accuracy of two index tests and two studies compared the accuracy of three index tests. Thirty-four studies (4242 participants) evaluated serology; 29 studies (2988 participants) evaluated stool antigen test; 34 studies (3139 participants) evaluated urea breath test-13C; 21 studies (1810 participants) evaluated urea breath test-14C; and two studies (127 participants) evaluated urea breath test but did not report the isotope used. The thresholds used to define test positivity and the staining techniques used for histopathological examination (reference standard) varied between studies. Due to sparse data for each threshold reported, it was not possible to identify the best threshold for each test.Using data from 99 studies in an indirect test comparison, there was statistical evidence of a difference in diagnostic accuracy between urea breath test-13C, urea breath test-14C, serology and stool antigen test (P = 0.024). The diagnostic odds ratios for urea breath test-13C, urea breath test-14C, serology, and stool antigen test were 153 (95% confidence interval (CI) 73.7 to 316), 105 (95% CI 74.0 to 150), 47.4 (95% CI 25.5 to 88.1) and 45.1 (95% CI 24.2 to 84.1). The sensitivity (95% CI) estimated at a fixed specificity of 0.90 (median from studies across the four tests), was 0.94 (95% CI 0.89 to 0.97) for urea breath test-13C, 0.92 (95% CI 0.89 to 0.94) for urea breath test-14C, 0.84 (95% CI 0.74 to 0.91) for serology, and 0.83 (95% CI 0.73 to 0.90) for stool antigen test. This implies that on average, given a specificity of 0.90 and prevalence of 53.7% (median specificity and prevalence in the studies), out of 1000 people tested for H pylori infection, there will be 46 false positives (people without H pylori infection who will be diagnosed as having H pylori infection). In this hypothetical cohort, urea breath test-13C, urea breath test-14C, serology, and stool antigen test will give 30 (95% CI 15 to 58), 42 (95% CI 30 to 58), 86 (95% CI 50 to 140), and 89 (95% CI 52 to 146) false negatives respectively (people with H pylori infection for whom the diagnosis of H pylori will be missed).Direct comparisons were based on few head-to-head studies. The ratios of diagnostic odds ratios (DORs) were 0.68 (95% CI 0.12 to 3.70; P = 0.56) for urea breath test-13C versus serology (seven studies), and 0.88 (95% CI 0.14 to 5.56; P = 0.84) for urea breath test-13C versus stool antigen test (seven studies). The 95% CIs of these estimates overlap with those of the ratios of DORs from the indirect comparison. Data were limited or unavailable for meta-analysis of other direct comparisons.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In people without a history of gastrectomy and those who have not recently had antibiotics or proton ,pump inhibitors, urea breath tests had high diagnostic accuracy while serology and stool antigen tests were less accurate for diagnosis of Helicobacter pylori infection.This is based on an indirect test comparison (with potential for bias due to confounding), as evidence from direct comparisons was limited or unavailable. The thresholds used for these tests were highly variable and we were unable to identify specific thresholds that might be useful in clinical practice.We need further comparative studies of high methodological quality to obtain more reliable evidence of relative accuracy between the tests. Such studies should be conducted prospectively in a representative spectrum of participants and clearly reported to ensure low risk of bias. Most importantly, studies should prespecify and clearly report thresholds used, and should avoid inappropriate exclusions.

Evaluation of the effect of presence of blood in the stomach on endoscopic diagnostic tests for Helicobacter pylori infection

INTRODUCTION

Presence of blood in the stomach has been thought to affect the performance of diagnostic tests used in detecting Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) in the stomach. This study evaluated the effect of blood on the efficacy of rapid urease test (RUT) and microscopic appearance of the biopsy after staining with Giemsa stain.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients with bleeding oesophageal varices who met the inclusion criteria were tested for H. pylori by RUT and microscopic examination of the biopsy. A repeat endoscopy, RUT and histology were done one month following initial presentation. The performance of the diagnostic tests was evaluated with and without the presence of intraluminal blood. A combined result of the two tests, RUT and histology, carried out in presence or absence of blood for the diagnosis of H. pylori, when considered together was considered as the gold standard.

RESULTS

Thirty six patients included in the study were in the ages ranging between 15-60 years (mean age = 44.14 years ± 2.1). The combination of tests at both visits showed 20/36 (55.6%) patients were positive for H. pylori. The decrease in H. pylori positivity in the presence of blood was significant for RUT (8.3% vs. 38.9%; P=0.005) and combined test (19.4% vs. 47.2%; P=0.02) but the decrease in positivity for histology (11.1% vs 30.6%) was not significant (P=0.08). In the presence of blood, the sensitivity of RUT, histology and combined tests were 15%, 20% and 35%, respectively. In the absence of blood, the sensitivity of RUT, histology and combination of tests was 70%, 55% and 85%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Blood in the stomach significantly decreased the sensitivity of RUT, histology and the combination of both. Negative results of these tests in acute upper gastro intestinal (GI) bleeding should therefore be interpreted carefully.

Real-time PCR improves Helicobacter pylori detection in patients with peptic ulcer bleeding

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Histological and rapid urease tests to detect H. pylori in biopsy specimens obtained during peptic ulcer bleeding episodes (PUB) often produce false-negative results. We aimed to examine whether immunohistochemistry and real-time PCR can improve the sensitivity of these biopsies.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We selected 52 histology-negative formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded biopsy specimens obtained during PUB episodes. Additional tests showed 10 were true negatives and 42 were false negatives. We also selected 17 histology-positive biopsy specimens obtained during PUB to use as controls. We performed immunohistochemistry staining and real-time PCR for 16S rRNA, ureA, and 23S rRNA for H. pylori genes on all specimens.

RESULTS

All controls were positive for H. pylori on all PCR assays and immunohistochemical staining. Regarding the 52 initially negative biopsies, all PCR tests were significantly more sensitive than immunohistochemical staining (p<0.01). Sensitivity and specificity were 55% and 80% for 16S rRNA PCR, 43% and 90% for ureA PCR, 41% and 80% for 23S rRNA PCR, and 7% and 100% for immunohistochemical staining, respectively. Combined analysis of PCR assays for two genes were significantly more sensitive than ureA or 23S rRNA PCR tests alone (p<0.05) and marginally better than 16S rRNA PCR alone. The best combination was 16S rRNA+ureA, with a sensitivity of 64% and a specificity of 80%.

CONCLUSIONS

Real-time PCR improves the detection of H. pylori infection in histology-negative formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded biopsy samples obtained during PUB episodes. The low reported prevalence of H. pylori in PUB may be due to the failure of conventional tests to detect infection.

Has H. pylori prevalence in bleeding peptic ulcer been underestimated? A meta-regression

OBJECTIVES

It has been suggested that prevalence of Helicobacter pylori (Hp) in peptic ulcer bleeding (PUB) is lower than that in non-complicated ulcers. As Hp infection is elusive in PUB, we hypothesized that this low prevalence could be related to an insufficiently intensive search for the bacteria. The aim of the study was to evaluate whether the prevalence of Hp in PUB depends on the diagnostic methods used in a given study.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed of studies assessing the prevalence of Hp infection in patients with PUB. Data were extracted in duplicate. Univariate and multivariate random-effects meta-regression analyses were performed to determine the factors that explained the differences in Hp prevalence between studies.

RESULTS

The review retrieved 71 articles, including 8,496 patients. The mean prevalence of Hp infection in PUB was 72%. The meta-regression analysis showed that the most significant variables associated with a high prevalence of Hp infection were the use of a diagnostic test delayed until at least 4 weeks after the PUB episode-odds ratio: 2.08, 95% confidence interval: 1.10-3.93, P=0.024-and a lower mean age of patients-odds ratio: 0.95 per additional year, 95% confidence interval: 0.92-0.99, P=0.008.

CONCLUSIONS

Studies that performed a delayed test and those including younger patients found a higher prevalence of Hp, approaching that recorded in cases of non-bleeding ulcers. These results suggest that the low prevalence of Hp infection described in PUB may be related to the methodology of the studies and to patients' characteristics, and that the true prevalence of Hp in PUB is still to be determined. Our data also support the recent recommendations of the International Consensus on Non-Variceal Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding regarding the performance of a delayed diagnostic test when Hp tests carried out during the acute PUB episode are negative.