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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |