Comparison of five diagnostic methods for Helicobacter pylori

Area of Science:

• Medical Diagnostics
• Microbiology

Background:

• Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) infection diagnosis involves various invasive and non-invasive methods.
• Test selection depends on sensitivity, specificity, clinical context, and cost-effectiveness.

Purpose of the Study:

• To analyze the relationships between different H. pylori diagnostic methods.
• To define the optimal application scope for each diagnostic technique.

Main Methods:

• Biopsies were analyzed using histology (H&E, Giemsa staining) and PCR amplification of the ureC (glmM) gene.
• Non-invasive tests included a rapid urease test (RUT), stool antigen ELISA, and serum IgG antibody ELISA.

Main Results:

• Histology and RUT demonstrated the highest sensitivity (95.6%) and specificity (100%), respectively.
• PCR (93.5% sensitivity, 95.6% specificity) and serology (91.3% sensitivity, 55.6% specificity) also showed good performance.
• The stool antigen test had lower sensitivity (73.9%) and specificity (86.7%).

Conclusions:

• Invasive diagnostic methods, particularly histology and RUT, provide superior accuracy for H. pylori detection.
• Relying solely on non-invasive tests may compromise the accuracy of H. pylori diagnosis.