Cargando…

1995. Implementation of Helicobacter pylori Stool Antigen Testing in a Large Metropolitan Centre: A Prospective Comparative Diagnostic Trial

BACKGROUND: Clinical guidelines for H. pylori screening and post-treatment testing endorse the use of urea breath test (UBT), H. pylori stool antigen test (HpSAT), and biopsy-related tests. Due to protracted wait times at our patient service centers and non-compliance in children and elderly with co...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Fong, Evelyn, Nguyen, Hong, Kitt, Sharon, Guo, Maggie, Sabuda, Deana, Naugler, Christopher, Church, Deirdre, Pillai, Dylan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6253903/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofy210.1651
_version_ 1783373601071693824
author Fong, Evelyn
Nguyen, Hong
Kitt, Sharon
Guo, Maggie
Sabuda, Deana
Naugler, Christopher
Church, Deirdre
Pillai, Dylan
author_facet Fong, Evelyn
Nguyen, Hong
Kitt, Sharon
Guo, Maggie
Sabuda, Deana
Naugler, Christopher
Church, Deirdre
Pillai, Dylan
author_sort Fong, Evelyn
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Clinical guidelines for H. pylori screening and post-treatment testing endorse the use of urea breath test (UBT), H. pylori stool antigen test (HpSAT), and biopsy-related tests. Due to protracted wait times at our patient service centers and non-compliance in children and elderly with complications for the UBT, we sought to compare UBT and HpSAT in the city of Calgary, Canada with a population close to 1.4 million people. METHODS: To achieve this, a prospective diagnostic trial was performed comparing UBT to HpSAT in patients presenting with dyspepsia. A total of N = 150 patients agreed to undergo UBT ((13)C-UBT kit, Helikit, Isodiagnostika Inc.) and consented to provide a stool specimen for simultaneous HpSAT testing (Diasorin LIAISON® XL H. pylori SA Monoclonal chemiluminescent immunoassay) in our centralized laboratory. RESULTS: Our data show that concordant results were obtained in 148/150 (98.7%) patients with a positivity rate of 17.4%. One of two discrepants (UBT positive/HpSAT negative) resolved after repeat testing. Using UBT as the gold standard, HpSAT had a sensitivity of 96.30% (95% CI; 81.03% to 99.91%) and specificity of 100% (95% CI; 97.05% to 100.00%). A positive predictive value of 100% and negative predictive value of 99.2% (95% CI; 94.73% to 99.88%) was obtained. For patients where drug information was available, 38/130 (29.2%) had received an antibiotic associated with H. pylori in the preceding 12 months, with UBT and HpSAT providing concordant results in 37/38 (97.4%) of these individuals. Of note, 6/130 (4.6%) patients had received a specific combination anti-H.pylori treatment, and all 6/6 (100%) had concordant negative results suggesting successful eradication. A post-implementation economic evaluation of labor and materials associated with testing demonstrates a cost-savings of approximately USD5.47 per specimen in this locale. CONCLUSION: Our study confirms that HpSAT is a viable alternative to UBT for H. pylori screening in our jurisdiction with equivalent test performance and cost-savings. Pre- and post-implementation analysis of test compliance rates, waiting times, and test turn around times will also be presented. DISCLOSURES: D. Pillai, Diasorin: None, Educational grant.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6253903
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-62539032018-11-28 1995. Implementation of Helicobacter pylori Stool Antigen Testing in a Large Metropolitan Centre: A Prospective Comparative Diagnostic Trial Fong, Evelyn Nguyen, Hong Kitt, Sharon Guo, Maggie Sabuda, Deana Naugler, Christopher Church, Deirdre Pillai, Dylan Open Forum Infect Dis Abstracts BACKGROUND: Clinical guidelines for H. pylori screening and post-treatment testing endorse the use of urea breath test (UBT), H. pylori stool antigen test (HpSAT), and biopsy-related tests. Due to protracted wait times at our patient service centers and non-compliance in children and elderly with complications for the UBT, we sought to compare UBT and HpSAT in the city of Calgary, Canada with a population close to 1.4 million people. METHODS: To achieve this, a prospective diagnostic trial was performed comparing UBT to HpSAT in patients presenting with dyspepsia. A total of N = 150 patients agreed to undergo UBT ((13)C-UBT kit, Helikit, Isodiagnostika Inc.) and consented to provide a stool specimen for simultaneous HpSAT testing (Diasorin LIAISON® XL H. pylori SA Monoclonal chemiluminescent immunoassay) in our centralized laboratory. RESULTS: Our data show that concordant results were obtained in 148/150 (98.7%) patients with a positivity rate of 17.4%. One of two discrepants (UBT positive/HpSAT negative) resolved after repeat testing. Using UBT as the gold standard, HpSAT had a sensitivity of 96.30% (95% CI; 81.03% to 99.91%) and specificity of 100% (95% CI; 97.05% to 100.00%). A positive predictive value of 100% and negative predictive value of 99.2% (95% CI; 94.73% to 99.88%) was obtained. For patients where drug information was available, 38/130 (29.2%) had received an antibiotic associated with H. pylori in the preceding 12 months, with UBT and HpSAT providing concordant results in 37/38 (97.4%) of these individuals. Of note, 6/130 (4.6%) patients had received a specific combination anti-H.pylori treatment, and all 6/6 (100%) had concordant negative results suggesting successful eradication. A post-implementation economic evaluation of labor and materials associated with testing demonstrates a cost-savings of approximately USD5.47 per specimen in this locale. CONCLUSION: Our study confirms that HpSAT is a viable alternative to UBT for H. pylori screening in our jurisdiction with equivalent test performance and cost-savings. Pre- and post-implementation analysis of test compliance rates, waiting times, and test turn around times will also be presented. DISCLOSURES: D. Pillai, Diasorin: None, Educational grant. Oxford University Press 2018-11-26 /pmc/articles/PMC6253903/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofy210.1651 Text en © The Author(s) 2018. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Infectious Diseases Society of America. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial reproduction and distribution of the work, in any medium, provided the original work is not altered or transformed in any way, and that the work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com
spellingShingle Abstracts
Fong, Evelyn
Nguyen, Hong
Kitt, Sharon
Guo, Maggie
Sabuda, Deana
Naugler, Christopher
Church, Deirdre
Pillai, Dylan
1995. Implementation of Helicobacter pylori Stool Antigen Testing in a Large Metropolitan Centre: A Prospective Comparative Diagnostic Trial
title 1995. Implementation of Helicobacter pylori Stool Antigen Testing in a Large Metropolitan Centre: A Prospective Comparative Diagnostic Trial
title_full 1995. Implementation of Helicobacter pylori Stool Antigen Testing in a Large Metropolitan Centre: A Prospective Comparative Diagnostic Trial
title_fullStr 1995. Implementation of Helicobacter pylori Stool Antigen Testing in a Large Metropolitan Centre: A Prospective Comparative Diagnostic Trial
title_full_unstemmed 1995. Implementation of Helicobacter pylori Stool Antigen Testing in a Large Metropolitan Centre: A Prospective Comparative Diagnostic Trial
title_short 1995. Implementation of Helicobacter pylori Stool Antigen Testing in a Large Metropolitan Centre: A Prospective Comparative Diagnostic Trial
title_sort 1995. implementation of helicobacter pylori stool antigen testing in a large metropolitan centre: a prospective comparative diagnostic trial
topic Abstracts
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6253903/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofy210.1651
work_keys_str_mv AT fongevelyn 1995implementationofhelicobacterpyloristoolantigentestinginalargemetropolitancentreaprospectivecomparativediagnostictrial
AT nguyenhong 1995implementationofhelicobacterpyloristoolantigentestinginalargemetropolitancentreaprospectivecomparativediagnostictrial
AT kittsharon 1995implementationofhelicobacterpyloristoolantigentestinginalargemetropolitancentreaprospectivecomparativediagnostictrial
AT guomaggie 1995implementationofhelicobacterpyloristoolantigentestinginalargemetropolitancentreaprospectivecomparativediagnostictrial
AT sabudadeana 1995implementationofhelicobacterpyloristoolantigentestinginalargemetropolitancentreaprospectivecomparativediagnostictrial
AT nauglerchristopher 1995implementationofhelicobacterpyloristoolantigentestinginalargemetropolitancentreaprospectivecomparativediagnostictrial
AT churchdeirdre 1995implementationofhelicobacterpyloristoolantigentestinginalargemetropolitancentreaprospectivecomparativediagnostictrial
AT pillaidylan 1995implementationofhelicobacterpyloristoolantigentestinginalargemetropolitancentreaprospectivecomparativediagnostictrial