2006PubMedRequires access

Comparative study on a homemade rapid urease test with gastric biopsy for diagnosis of Helicobacter pylori infection.

Makaju Rk, Tamang, Yuba Raj Sharma, Nastu Sharma, Rajendra Koju, Bedi Tr, Sharad Khanal

Open publisher page 4 citations

Abstract

The main objective of this study was to determine whether a homemade rapid urease test was reliable when compared to histology in the diagnosis of Helicobacter pylori infection. Endoscopic antral biopsies from 15th August 2004 to 15th July 2005 were studied prospectively. Rapid urease test and histological examination were done on all specimens. Among 160 biopsies, 56 cases showed H. pylori in histological section and 59 cases were rapid urease test positive. Among 56 H. pylori infected patients, the sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, percentage of false positive, and percentage of false negative values of rapid urease test were 96.4%, 95.2%, 91.5%, 98.0%, 4.8% and 3.5% respectively. Rapid urease test is positive in significantly higher number (p < 0.001) in histological positive cases. In conclusion our homemade rapid urease test is a test with good sensitivity and specificity for detection of H. pylori infection.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

The main objective of this study was to determine whether a homemade rapid urease test was reliable when compared to histology in the diagnosis of Helicobacter pylori infection. Endoscopic antral biopsies from 15th August 2004 to 15th July 2005 were studied prospectively. Rapid urease test and histological examination were done on all specimens. Among 160 biopsies, 56 cases showed H. pylori in histological section and 59 cases were rapid urease test positive. Among 56 H. pylori infected patients, the sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, percentage of false positive, and percentage of false negative values of rapid urease test were 96.4%, 95.2%, 91.5%, 98.0%, 4.8% and 3.5% respectively. Rapid urease test is positive in significantly higher number (p < 0.001) in histological positive cases. In conclusion our homemade rapid urease test is a test with good sensitivity and specificity for detection of H. pylori infection.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 4 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

The main objective of this study was to determine whether a homemade rapid urease test was reliable when compared to histology in the diagnosis of Helicobacter pylori infection. Endoscopic antral biopsies from 15th August 2004 to 15th July 2005 were studied prospectively. Rapid urease test and histological examination were done on all specimens. Among 160 biopsies, 56 cases showed H. pylori in histological section and 59 cases were rapid urease test positive. Among 56 H. pylori infected patients, the sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, percentage of false positive, and percentage of false negative values of rapid urease test were 96.4%, 95.2%, 91.5%, 98.0%, 4.8% and 3.5% respectively. Rapid urease test is positive in significantly higher number (p < 0.001) in histological positive cases. In conclusion our homemade rapid urease test is a test with good sensitivity and specificity for detection of H. pylori infection.

Key concepts: Rapid urease test, Medicine, Helicobacter pylori, Urease, Gastroenterology, Histology, Biopsy, Positive predicative value

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Comparative study on a homemade rapid urease test with gastric biopsy for diagnosis of Helicobacter pylori infection. — Research Paper | ScholarLens