Altmetrics
Downloads
104
Views
44
Comments
0
A peer-reviewed article of this preprint also exists.
This version is not peer-reviewed
Submitted:
15 December 2023
Posted:
18 December 2023
You are already at the latest version
Diagnostic test | Sensitivity | Specificity | Advantages/Disadvantages | References |
---|---|---|---|---|
Urea breath test (UBT) | >95% | >95% |
Advantages: Gold standard in many clinical diagnoses, Cost-effective, reliable, simple, non-invasive, can be used for confirming eradication of infection Disadvantages: May give false negatives in presence of other urease producing bacteria and Helicobacter species. Low accuracy under conditions of gastritis and gastric malignancies, requires a high load of bacteria in the specimen. Requires expensive equipment. |
[96, 83] |
Stool Antigen test (SAT) | 96% | 97% |
Advantages: Cost-effective, simple, rapid, doesn’t require expensive instruments Disadvantages: It may give false negatives under low bacterial count, and accuracy is affected by recent intake of PPI and CAM, not useful for post-eradication confirmation |
[87, 86] |
Serological tests | 85% | >80% |
Advantages: Inexpensive, can be employed for patients who have recently undergone triple therapy. Only test not affected by PPI intake or use of antibiotics Disadvantages: Unreliable for ongoing infections, cannot be used to confirm eradication |
[74] |
Rapid urease test (RUT) | 80-90% | 93-100%. |
Advantages: Rapid, inexpensive, simple Disadvantages: Invasive, requires additional confirmatory tests, accuracy affected by intake of PPI and antibiotics |
[45] |
Culture | 70-90% | 100% |
Advantages: Gold standard for confirmation, can be used to ascertain antibiotic sensitivity Disadvantages: Elaborate, time-consuming, expensive, requires specific expertise in microbiology |
[97] |
Histopathology | >95% | 99% | Advantages: Gold standard in routine clinical diagnostics, provides additional information about associated pathologies, extremely sensitive and specific | [88] |
Molecular methods (PCR) | 96% | 98% |
Sensitive even at very low bacterial counts Disadvantages: Expensive, requires sophisticated equpiments, may give false positive results |
[75] |
Treatment option | Drugs employed | Duration of therapy | References |
---|---|---|---|
Triple therapy (PPI+ two antibiotics) |
PPI, Clarithromycin, Amoxicillin (or Metronidazole) | 7 days | [119] |
Bismuth Quadruple therapy (BQT) | PPI, bismuth, tetracycline, and metronidazole | 14 days | [29] |
Levofloxacin-containing triple therapy | PPI, levofloxacin, amoxicillin | 14 days | [120] |
Levofloxacin-amoxicillin quadruple therapy | PPI, bismuth, levofloxacin, amoxicillin | 10 days | [121] |
Tetracycline-levofloxacin quadruple therapy | PPI, bismuth, levofloxacin, tetracycline | 10 days | [122] |
Concomitant therapy (non-bismuth therapy) | PPI, amoxicillin, clarithromycin, and a nitrimidazole | [119] | |
Sequential therapy (dual) | PPI and amoxicillin for 5 days, followed by triple therapy (PPI, clarithromycin, and tinidazole) for next 5 days | 10 days | [123] |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2024 MDPI (Basel, Switzerland) unless otherwise stated