Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow E-letters: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when E-letters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Roberts, A. P
Right arrow Articles by de Wit, N. J
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Roberts, A. P
Right arrow Articles by de Wit, N. J
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Family Practice Vol. 17, No. 90002, S12-s20
© Oxford University Press 2000


Article

Tests for Helicobacter pylori infection: a critical appraisal from primary care

Anthony P Roberts, Susan M Childs, Greg Rubina and Niek J de Witb

Centre for Health Studies, University of Durham, 32 Old Elvet, Durham DH1 3HN,
a Centre for Primary Health Care Studies,University of Sunderland, UK and
b Department of General Practice,University of Utrecht, The Netherlands.

Abstract

Background. Testing of patients for Helicobacter pylori infection is common in primary care settings. The accuracy of such tests has been assessed and critical appraisal of this literature can inform the clinical management of patients suspected of being infected with H.pylori.

Methods. Literature evaluating the accuracy of diagnostic tests for H.pylori infection was sought as part of a systematic review of literature concerning the management of patients infected with H.pylori. Studies were appraised and estimates of sensitivity and specificity were extracted. Positive and negative likelihood ratios (LRs) were calculated and the implications for post-test probabilities are reported.

Results. The sensitivity, specificity, LR+ and LR– for H.pylori infection tests are: [13C]urea breath test (UBT), 96.5, 96, 24 and 0.04; [14C]UBT, 97.5, 95.5, 21 and 0.03; serology, 91, 89.5, 8 and 0.11; near patient tests, 77, 74, 3 and 0.31; and meta-analysis of serology, 85, 79, 4 and 0.19. The range of pre-test probabilities of H.pylori infection in which the diagnostic tests were useful, estimated from primary studies, were: [13C]UBT, 20–90%; [14C]UBT, 20–99%; serology, 30–80%; and near patient tests, 50–60%.

Conclusions. Tests for H.pylori infection are useful in primary care when the pre-test probability of infection is neither too high nor too low. This indicates that the tests may not be useful for screening purposes but may help with differential diagnosis. Outside moderate pre-test probability ranges, the chances of a result being false is high, and such patients should either receive eradication without prior testing (if the probability of infection is sufficiently high) or the test result should be reconfirmed. When the pre-test probability falls below ~20%, a positive test result is unreliable. If the pre-test probability is above ~80%, a negative test result is unreliable. Clinical selection of patients needing testing should be used to limit testing to individuals with pre-test probabilities within these ranges. The choice of diagnostic H.pylori test should be influenced by the H.pylori infection rate in the population being tested and the test characteristics. Recommendations for the use of tests, especially near patient tests, should be reconsidered. This critical appraisal supports the recommendations of the European Society for Primary Care Gastroenterology guidelines, arrived at by consensus, for testing for H.pylori infection in primary care.

Keywords. Diagnostic tests and procedures, gastroenterology, Helicobacter pylori, primary health care.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Med Decis MakingHome page
P. M. Barton, P. Moayyedi, N. J. Talley, N. B. Vakil, and B. C. Delaney
A Second-Order Simulation Model of the Cost-Effectiveness of Managing Dyspepsia in the United States
Med Decis Making, January 1, 2008; 28(1): 44 - 55.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
DTBHome page
Which test for Helicobacter pylori in primary care?
DTB, September 1, 2004; 42(9): 71 - 72.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Fam PractHome page
H. Kolk, H.-I. Maaroos, I. Kull, K. Labotkin, K. Loivukene, and M. Mikelsaar
Open access endoscopy in an epidemiological situation of high prevalence of Helicobacter pylori infection: applicability of the guidelines of the European Society for Primary Care Gastroenterology
Fam. Pract., June 1, 2002; 19(3): 231 - 235.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
BMJHome page
B C Delaney, S Wilson, A Roalfe, L Roberts, V Redman, A Wearn, and F D R Hobbs
Randomised controlled trial of Helicobacter pylori testing and endoscopy for dyspepsia in primary care
BMJ, April 14, 2001; 322(7291): 898 - 898.
[Abstract] [Full Text]



Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.