Premium
A systematic review and meta‐analysis of genotypic methods for detecting antibiotic resistance in Helicobacter pylori
Author(s) -
Wang Youhua,
Li Zhen,
Wang Le,
Zhuge Liya,
Zhao Rulin,
Wu Shuang,
Wang Ya,
An Ying,
Xie Yong
Publication year - 2018
Publication title -
helicobacter
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.206
H-Index - 79
eISSN - 1523-5378
pISSN - 1083-4389
DOI - 10.1111/hel.12467
Subject(s) - medicine , helicobacter pylori , cochrane library , meta analysis , odds ratio , diagnostic odds ratio , genotype , gastroenterology , clarithromycin , antibiotics , antibiotic resistance , microbiology and biotechnology , biology , genetics , gene
Background Antibiotic susceptibility testing is essential for tailored treatments to cure Helicobacter pylori ( H. pylori ) infection. However, phenotypic methods have some limitations. Objectives To evaluate the feasibility of genotypic detection methods compared with phenotypic detection methods using samples taken from H. pylori ‐infected patients. Methods Literature searches were conducted in the following databases (from January 2000 to November 2016): PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science. A meta‐analysis and systematic review was performed for studies that compared genotypic methods with phenotypic methods for the detection of H. pylori antibiotic susceptibility. Results This meta‐analysis showed that the pooled sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic odds ratio ( DOR ) for the A2142G/C and/or A2143G combination for the detection of clarithromycin resistance in the strain samples were 0.97 (95% CI : 0.94‐0.99), 1.00 (95% CI : 0.99‐1.00), and 13 742 (95% CI : 1708‐110 554), respectively. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, and DOR for the A2142G/C and/or A2143G combination for the detection of clarithromycin resistance in biopsy samples were 0.96 (95% CI : 0.90‐0.99), 0.96 (95% CI : 0.91‐0.99), and 722 (95% CI : 117‐4443), respectively. The summarized sensitivity, specificity, and DOR value for the ability of the genotypic methods to detect quinolone resistance in biopsy specimens were 0.97 (95% CI : 0.87‐0.99), 0.99 (95% CI : 0.92‐1.00), and 6042 (95% CI : 486‐75 143), respectively. Conclusion The genotypic detection methods were reliable for the diagnosis of clarithromycin and quinolone resistance in the strain and biopsy specimens. The A2142G/C and/or A2143G combination had the best sensitivity and specificity for the detection of clarithromycin resistance.