Premium
Screening for Helicobacter pylori in young dyspeptic patients referred for investigation—endoscopy for those who test negative
Author(s) -
Niall Breslin,
J Lee,
Martin Buckley,
Colm O’Moráin
Publication year - 1998
Publication title -
alimentary pharmacology and therapeutics
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 3.308
H-Index - 177
eISSN - 1365-2036
pISSN - 0269-2813
DOI - 10.1046/j.1365-2036.1998.00339.x
Subject(s) - helicobacter pylori , medicine , endoscopy , gastroenterology , helicobacter infections , test (biology) , spirillaceae , screening test , gastritis , family medicine , biology , paleontology
Background: Studies in young dyspeptic patients have suggested that screening strategies based on non‐invasive H. pylori testing can reduce endoscopy workload by 25–40%. Such strategies usually propose that only H. pylori ‐positive individuals should undergo endoscopy. This approach may fail to diagnose idiopathic ulcers, ulcers in patients whose screening test is falsely negative and reflux disease. Aim: To investigate a hypothetical screening strategy in which endoscopy is initially performed only in H. pylori ‐negative dyspeptics. Methods: Seventy‐two consecutive patients under 45 years of age undergoing investigation for ‘ulcer‐like’ dyspepsia had invasive and non‐invasive determination of H. pylori status. Individuals found to be H. pylori ‐positive at endoscopy received 1 week of proton pump inhibitor‐based triple therapy. H. pylori ‐negative individuals received therapy tailored to their diagnosis. Endoscopy was repeated in the positive group to confirm successful eradication. Results were analysed according to our strategy, i.e. serologically‐positive patients would have received eradication therapy without endoscopy, but patients found to be negative would have been referred for endoscopy. Results: According to the serology test there were 39 positive and 33 negative results. Symptoms failed to resolve during follow‐up in nine of the serological positives despite successful eradication. There were also five false positives who were deemed likely treatment failures. Thus according to our strategy, these 14 serologically‐positive patients would ultimately have required an endoscopy and the other 25 serologically‐positive patients would have avoided an endoscopy, resulting in a 35% reduction in endoscopy usage in this population. In the serologically‐negative group there were three cases of peptic ulcer disease where the test was falsely negative, but they were detected by the strategy. No cases of gastric malignancy were detected at endoscopy. Thus our strategy would have reduced initial endoscopy referrals by 35% in this selected population. Conclusion: A strategy of empirical H. pylori eradication therapy can safely reduce the requirement for endoscopy in young dyspeptic patients without sinister symptoms.