ArticleJournal of gastroenterology2009
Use of the lactose-[13C]ureide breath test for diagnosis of small bowel bacterial overgrowth: comparison to the glucose hydrogen breath test.
Article in Journal of gastroenterology, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- European guideline on indications, performance and clinical impact ofUnited European gastroenterology journal · 2021Guideline
- Breath Tests for the Non-invasive Diagnosis of Small Intestinal Bacterial Overgrowth: A Systematic Review With Meta-analysis.Journal of neurogastroenterology and motility · 2020Pooled it
- The metabolic fate of doubly labelled lactose-[13C, 15N]ureide after pre-dosing with different ureides.European journal of clinical nutrition · 2010Trial
- Hydrogen and Methane Breath Test: The Asian Neurogastroenterology and Motility Association Monograph.Journal of neurogastroenterology and motility · 2026Review
- Measurement of Oro-Cecal Transit Time in LPS-Treated Pigs Fed High and Low Fiber Diets Using the Lactose-Journal of agricultural and food chemistry · 2025Article
- Diagnosis by Microbial Culture, Breath Tests and Urinary Excretion Tests, and Treatments of Small Intestinal Bacterial Overgrowth.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Asian-Pacific consensus on small intestinal bacterial overgrowth in gastrointestinal disorders: An initiative of the Indian Neurogastroenterology and Motility Association.Indian journal of gastroenterology : official journal of the Indian Society of Gastroenterology · 2022Article
- The gut microbiota and irritable bowel syndrome: friend or foe?International journal of inflammation · 2012Article
- Small intestinal bacterial overgrowth syndrome.World journal of gastroenterology · 2010Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe glucose hydrogen breath test (GHBT) is commonly used as a noninvasive test to diagnose small bowel bacterial overgrowth (SBBO) but its validity has been questioned. Our aim was to evaluate the lactose-[(13)C]ureide breath test (LUBT) to diagnose SBBO and to compare it with the GHBT, using cultures of intestinal aspirates as a gold standard.
methodsIn 22 patients with suspected SBBO (14 male, age range 18-73 years) aspirates were taken from the region of the ligament of Treitz under sterile conditions and cultured for bacterial growth. More than 10(6) colony-forming units/mL fluid or the presence of colonic flora was defined as culture positive (c+). After oral intake of 50 g glucose and 2 g of lactose-[(13)C]ureide, end-expiratory breath samples were obtained up to 120 min. The (13)C/(12)C ratio in breath CO(2) was determined by isotope ratio-mass spectrometry and hydrogen concentration in breath was analyzed electrochemically.
resultsAfter analyzing receiver operating characteristic curves of the LUBT results, total label recovery of >0.88% at 120 min was considered positive. The test had a sensitivity of 66.7% and a specificity of 100% to predict c+. In the GHBT, an increase of the signal of > or =12 ppm from baseline was considered positive. The sensitivity and specificity of the test were 41.7 and 44.4%, respectively.
conclusionsThe new stable isotope-labeled LUBT has excellent specificity but suboptimal sensitivity. In contrast, the standard GHBT lacks both high sensitivity and specificity. The LUBT is superior to the GHBT for detecting SBBO.
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.