ArticleJournal of research in medical sciences : the official journal of Isfahan University of Medical Sciences2012
Validation of an in-house made rapid urease test kit against the commercial CLO-test in detecting Helicobacter pylori infection in the patients with gastric disorders.
Article in Journal of research in medical sciences : the official journal of Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- A multicenter prospective study on the diagnostic performance of a new liquid rapid urease test for the diagnosis ofGut pathogens · 2017Article
- Genotyping of the Helicobacter pylori cagA Gene Isolated From Gastric Biopsies in Shiraz, Southern Iran: A PCR-RFLP and Sequence Analysis Approach.Jundishapur journal of microbiology · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundH. pylori is a urease positive organism, and this activity in a gastric biopsy could be considered as a proof of the presence of H. pylori. For the reasons of high price and difficult accessibility to the commercial CLO-test in Iran, we designed an affordable equivalent test with high specificity, accuracy and availability.
methodsBiopsy samples from 80 symptomatic patients with gastrointestinal problems were included in this study. The results of our in-house made rapid urease kit were compared with the commercial CLO-test up to 3 hours and 24 hours after inoculation of the biopsy samples. Culture results and gram staining were proposed as gold standard.
resultsHelicobacter pylori was isolated from 36 patients (45.0%) after cultivation of biopsy samples. After 3 hours, 33 (91.6%) cases of positive samples for H. pylori, showed urease positive reaction using both, in-house made and CLO-test kits. However, 2 (5.5%) cases showed urease reaction at 24 hours using both the kits. The specificity of 100% was determined for both, in-house made and commercial CLO-test kits after 3 hours. The sensitivity for both the kits was estimated at 97.1% after 3hours. However, after 24 hours, sensitivity and specificity of 97.1% and 88.64% was estimated for the in-house and 97.2 % and 95.4% for the commercial CLO-test kits, respectively.
conclusionSpecificity and sensitivity of 100% and 97.1 % for up to 3 hours follow biopsy sampling, could be considered as an advantage for our in-house rapid urease kit. Moreover, the rapid urease agar media designed in our lab is cost-effective with adequate sensitivity and specificity levels for the detection of H. pylori, compared with the commercial CLO-test.
Indexed as
Identifiers
23267370PMC3527036W2134940195What 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.