HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via CrossRef Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Chisholm, S. A. Articles by Owen, R. J. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Chisholm, S. A. Articles by Owen, R. J. Agricola Articles by Chisholm, S. A. Articles by Owen, R. J.

Non-invasive diagnosis of Helicobacter pylori infection in adult dyspeptic patients by stool antigen detection: does the rapid immunochromatography test provide a reliable alternative to conventional ELISA kits?

¹Specialist and Reference Microbiology Division, 61 Colindale Avenue, Colindale, London NW9 5HT, UK ²Chelmsford Microbiology Laboratory, Chelmsford, UK ³Broomfield Hospital, Chelmsford, UK

Correspondence Stephanie A. Chisholm Stephanie.Chisholm{at}hpa.org.uk

Received October 8, 2003
Accepted March 15, 2004

Stool antigen-testing allows non-invasive detection of Helicobacter pylori that is indicative of active infection. Three commercial kits are currently marketed in the UK for stool antigen-testing. The aim of this study was to conduct a comparative evaluation of the performances of each of these tests, compared with culture and histological examination of gastric biopsies, for pre-treatment diagnosis of infection in an adult dyspeptic population in south-east England. Examination of 112 stool samples by the Premier Platinum HpSA ELISA (Meridian Diagnostics) and by the Amplified IDEIA HpStAR ELISA (DakoCytomation) kits demonstrated that the latter was more sensitive (81.3 versus 93.8 %, respectively) and specific (91.7 versus 100.0 %, respectively). Additionally, the IDEIA HpStAR was easier to interpret, with OD readings of positive and negative results being far from the recommended cut-off, whereas equivocal results that were generated by the HpSA kit were difficult to interpret. Additional testing of 87 of the 112 stools by the ImmunoCard STAT! HpSA kit (Meridian Diagnostics) demonstrated that this test was easier to perform than ELISA and was more sensitive than the HpSA kit but, compared with the IDEIA HpStAR kit, the ImmunoCard test was less sensitive (87.8 versus 95.9 %, respectively) and specific (89.4 versus 100.0 %, respectively). Furthermore, the ImmunoCard test generated weakly positive results, correlating with lower OD readings for both ELISA kits, that were difficult to interpret. The Amplified IDEIA HpStAR kit is therefore the most sensitive and specific of the three tests that are available for pre-treatment, non-invasive detection of H. pylori in stool samples in an English adult dyspeptic population.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				R. Krausse, G. Muller, and M. Doniec Evaluation of a Rapid New Stool Antigen Test for Diagnosis of Helicobacter pylori Infection in Adult Patients J. Clin. Microbiol., June 1, 2008; 46(6): 2062 - 2065. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				F. Megraud and P. Lehours Helicobacter pylori Detection and Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing Clin. Microbiol. Rev., April 1, 2007; 20(2): 280 - 322. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]