AIM: To quantitatively summarize and appraise the available evidence of urea breath test(UBT) use to diagnose Helicobacter pylori(H. pylori) infection in patients with dyspepsia and provide pooled diagnostic accuracy ...AIM: To quantitatively summarize and appraise the available evidence of urea breath test(UBT) use to diagnose Helicobacter pylori(H. pylori) infection in patients with dyspepsia and provide pooled diagnostic accuracy measures.METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane library and other databases for studies addressing the value of UBT in the diagnosis of H. pylori infection. We included cross-sectional studies that evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of UBT in adult patients with dyspeptic symptoms. Risk of bias was assessed using QUADAS(Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies)-2 tool. Diagnostic accuracy measures were pooled using the random-effects model. Subgroup analysis was conducted by UBT type(13C vs 14C) and by measurement technique(Infrared spectrometry vs Isotope Ratio Mass Spectrometry).RESULTS: Out of 1380 studies identified, only 23 met the eligibility criteria. Fourteen studies(61%) evaluated 13 C UBT and 9 studies(39%) evaluated 14 C UBT. There was significant variation in the type of reference standard tests used across studies.Pooled sensitivity was 0.96(95%CI: 0.95-0.97) andpooled specificity was 0.93(95%CI: 0.91-0.94). Likelihood ratio for a positive test was 12 and for a negative test was 0.05 with an area under thecurve of 0.985. Meta-analyses were associated with a significant statistical heterogeneity that remained unexplained after subgroup analysis. The included studies had a moderate risk of bias.CONCLUSION: UBT has high diagnostic accuracy for detecting H. pylori infection in patients with dyspepsia. The reliability of diagnostic meta-analytic estimates however is limited by significant heterogeneity.展开更多
文摘AIM: To quantitatively summarize and appraise the available evidence of urea breath test(UBT) use to diagnose Helicobacter pylori(H. pylori) infection in patients with dyspepsia and provide pooled diagnostic accuracy measures.METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane library and other databases for studies addressing the value of UBT in the diagnosis of H. pylori infection. We included cross-sectional studies that evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of UBT in adult patients with dyspeptic symptoms. Risk of bias was assessed using QUADAS(Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies)-2 tool. Diagnostic accuracy measures were pooled using the random-effects model. Subgroup analysis was conducted by UBT type(13C vs 14C) and by measurement technique(Infrared spectrometry vs Isotope Ratio Mass Spectrometry).RESULTS: Out of 1380 studies identified, only 23 met the eligibility criteria. Fourteen studies(61%) evaluated 13 C UBT and 9 studies(39%) evaluated 14 C UBT. There was significant variation in the type of reference standard tests used across studies.Pooled sensitivity was 0.96(95%CI: 0.95-0.97) andpooled specificity was 0.93(95%CI: 0.91-0.94). Likelihood ratio for a positive test was 12 and for a negative test was 0.05 with an area under thecurve of 0.985. Meta-analyses were associated with a significant statistical heterogeneity that remained unexplained after subgroup analysis. The included studies had a moderate risk of bias.CONCLUSION: UBT has high diagnostic accuracy for detecting H. pylori infection in patients with dyspepsia. The reliability of diagnostic meta-analytic estimates however is limited by significant heterogeneity.
