ArticleAnnals of Saudi medicine
Rapid detection of clarithromycin-resistant Helicobacter pylori in patients with dyspepsia by fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH) compared with the E-test.
Article in Annals of Saudi medicine. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of Levofloxacin-Based, 10-day Sequential Therapy with 14-day Quadruple Therapy forMiddle East journal of digestive diseases · 2018Article
- Comparing the efficacy of four different protocols for eradicating of Helicobacter pylori infection in Ahvaz, southwest Iran.Przeglad gastroenterologiczny · 2015Article
- Unreliability of results of PCR detection of Helicobacter pylori in clinical or environmental samples.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2009Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundClarithromycin is the antibiotic of choice for treatment of H.pylori-related dyspepsia, but unfortunately, resistance to clarithromycin is not rare. Detection of resistant strains takes 2 to 4 days by conventional methods. In this report, we applied the FISH technique for rapid detection of H.pylori in biopsies of dyspeptic patients.
methodsGastric biopsies from 50 patients suffering from dyspepsia were tested in this study. Part of each biopsy specimen was cultured and the remainder was fixed in liquid nitrogen. After mounting of frozen sections on microscopic slides, they were hybridized with oligonucleotide probes for detection of clarithromycin-resistant H.pylori. The slides were visualized under a fluorescent microscope. Susceptibility of cultured strains of H. pylori to clarithromycin was also determined by the E-test and the results were compared.
resultsTwenty-five of 50 biopsy specimens examined by FISH were positive for H.pylori. FISH showed that 17 strains (68%) were susceptible to clarithromycin and 6 strains (24%) were resistant. Bacteria isolated following culture of 2 biopsy specimens had a mixture of both clarithromycin-susceptible and resistant strains (8%). There was no discrepancy between the E-test and FISH technique for detection of resistant strains of H.pylori.
conclusionFISH is a rapid technique for detection of H.pylori in clinical samples. Moreover, strains susceptible to clarithromycin can be detected quickly. Therefore, this method is suitable for determination of susceptibility of H.pylori to clarithromycin, especially when a quick decision is necessary for treating dyspeptic patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.