Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25278682›Full record

ReviewWorld journal of gastroenterology2014

Diagnosis of Helicobacter pylori: what should be the gold standard?

Saurabh Kumar Patel, Chandra Bhan Pratap, Ashok Kumar Jain, Anil Kumar Gulati, Gopal Nath

Registry-linked trialOpen access · bronzeAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in World journal of gastroenterology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06273384 (Diagnostic Performance of Current Infection Marker), which is not on this map. Cited by 140 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
140citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
15.3field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT06273384 unknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2024, after this paper: background citation

Diagnostic Performance of Current Infection Marker (CIM) for Helicobacter Pylori Infection in Patients With Peptic Ulcer Bleeding

TypeobservationalSponsorMahidol UniversityRan2024 to 2024Enrolled135ConditionsHelicobacter Pylori Infection, Peptic Ulcer Hemorrhage
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

140 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 272 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2022
    Pooled it
  3. Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2019
    Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. CurrentJGH open : an open access journal of gastroenterology and hepatology · 2026
    Review
  9. Clinical validation of a fecal PCR assay forJournal of clinical microbiology · 2026
    Observational
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Systemic serological signatures and novel biomarker CST4 link CagA-positiveFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2026
    Article
  13. Update on the pathogenesis and clinical management ofWorld journal of gastrointestinal pathophysiology · 2025
    Review
  14. On the Role of Food in the Transmission ofFoods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Review
  15. International journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Microorganisms · 2025
    Article

80 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Saurabh Kumar PatelSaurabh Kumar Patel, Chandra Bhan Pratap, Anil Kumar Gulati, Gopal Nath, Department of Microbiology, Institute of Medical Sciences, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi, UP 221005, India.
Chandra Bhan PratapSaurabh Kumar Patel, Chandra Bhan Pratap, Anil Kumar Gulati, Gopal Nath, Department of Microbiology, Institute of Medical Sciences, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi, UP 221005, India.
Ashok Kumar JainSaurabh Kumar Patel, Chandra Bhan Pratap, Anil Kumar Gulati, Gopal Nath, Department of Microbiology, Institute of Medical Sciences, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi, UP 221005, India.
Anil Kumar GulatiSaurabh Kumar Patel, Chandra Bhan Pratap, Anil Kumar Gulati, Gopal Nath, Department of Microbiology, Institute of Medical Sciences, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi, UP 221005, India.
Gopal NathSaurabh Kumar Patel, Chandra Bhan Pratap, Anil Kumar Gulati, Gopal Nath, Department of Microbiology, Institute of Medical Sciences, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi, UP 221005, India.
Banaras Hindu University · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Since the discovery of Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) in 1983, numerous detection methods for the presence of the bacterium have been developed. Each one of them has been associated with advantages and disadvantages. Noninvasive tests such as serology, (13)C urea breath test (UBT) and stool antigen tests are usually preferred by the clinicians. Serology has its own limitation especially in endemic areas while (13)C UBT is technically very demanding. The stool antigen detection method, although specific, is usually associated with poor sensitivity. The (13)C UBT is believed to be specific, but with present revelation of the fact that stomach is colonized by many other urease producing bacteria makes it questionable. Histology, culture, rapid urease test and polymerase chain reaction (PCR) are the tests which are carried out on antral biopsies collected by invasive means. Histology has been proposed to be very sensitive and specific but the question is how by simply looking the morphology of the bacteria in the microscope, one can claim that the curved bacterium is exclusively H. pylori. Rapid urease test (RUT), the doctor's test, is also challenged because the presence of other urease producing bacteria in the stomach cannot be denied. Moreover, RUT has been reported with poor sensitivity specially, when density of the bacterium is low. Isolation of H. pylori is essential to investigate its growth requirements, antibiotic susceptibility testing, studying virulence factor to develop vaccine and many more explorations. It has also got several disadvantages i.e., special condition for transporting, media, incubation and few days waiting for the colonies to appear, apart from the speed essentially needed to process the specimens. Till date, majority of the microbiological laboratories in the world are not equipped and trained to isolate such fastidious bacterium. The option left is PCR methods to detect H. pylori's DNA in gastric mucosa, gastric juice, saliva, dental plaques and environmental specimens. There are speculations for false positivity due to detection of non-pylori Helicobacters due to genetic sharing; and false negativity due to low bacterial counts and presence of PCR inhibitors. However, specimen collection, transportation and processing do not require speed and special conditions. PCR based diagnosis may be considered as gold standard by designing primers extremely specific to H. pylori and targeting at least more than one conserved genes. Similarly specificity of PCR may be improved by use of internal Primers. Further, nested PCR will take care of false negatives by countering the effect of PCR inhibitors and low bacterial counts. Therefore, nested PCR based methods if performed properly, may be proposed as gold standard test.

Indexed as

Antigens, BacterialBacteriological TechniquesBiomarkersBiopsyBreath TestsDNA, BacterialFecesHelicobacter InfectionsHelicobacter pyloriHumansPolymerase Chain ReactionPredictive Value of TestsPrognosisReproducibility of ResultsSerologyStomachAntigens, BacterialBiomarkersDNA, BacterialGold standardHelicobacter pylori reviewInvasive testsNested polymerase chain reactionNon-invasive testsPolymerase chain reaction detection

Identifiers

PMID25278682
PMCPMC4177467
OpenAlexW2062361055

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.