Objective: To compare two rapid whole-blood serology tests for Helicobacter pylori and a laboratory serology assay against a gold standard.

Design: Prospective comparison of tests in 81 patients.

Setting: A hospital rapid access endoscopy clinic.

Participants: Dyspeptic patients requiring assessment of H. pylori status.

Interventions: Measurement of H. pylori antibody status by Quickvue One-step, Helisal, and Premier H. pylori test; 13C urea breath test for H. pylori, and gastric biopsies for histology, culture and rapid urease test.

Main Outcome Measure: Sensitivity and specificity of Quickvue One-step, Helisal and Premier tests, compared to a gold standard based on 13C urea breath test, biopsy culture, histology and urease test.

Results: The Quickvue assay has significantly greater sensitivity (81%) than Helisal (67%), but without appreciable loss of specificity (86% and 93%, respectively). The Premier laboratory assay is significantly more sensitive than both of the rapid blood tests (96%), with comparable specificity to the Quickvue assay.

Conclusion: The rapid serology tests used in this study are quick and convenient to use, but do not approach the sensitivity of a laboratory assay in detecting H. pylori status in this group of dyspeptic patients attending an endoscopy clinic.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/00042737-199908000-00009DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

rapid whole-blood
8
laboratory serology
8
helicobacter pylori
8
serology tests
8
dyspeptic patients
8
quickvue one-step
8
one-step helisal
8
helisal premier
8
13c urea
8
urea breath
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!