A combination of serum anti-Helicobacter pylori antibody titer and Kyoto classification score could provide a more accurate diagnosis of H pylori

19Citations
Citations of this article
27Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Background: We previously showed that the endoscopic Kyoto classification for gastritis could predict Helicobacter pylori infection in individuals with a high negative titer of serum anti-H pylori antibodies. This study evaluated H pylori infection and the Kyoto classification score in patients with a low negative titer (<3 U/ml), high negative titer (3–9.9 U/ml), low positive titer (10–49.9 U/ml), and high positive titer (≥50 U/ml). Methods: Serum antibody levels, Kyoto classification score and histology were investigated in 870 individuals with no history of H pylori-eradication therapy. Urea breath tests (UBTs) were additionally conducted for patients with a low negative titer and a Kyoto score ≥1 or an antibody titer ≥10 U/ml and a Kyoto score of 0 or 1. UBTs and/or histological studies were conducted for participants with a high negative titer. Results: False diagnoses based on anti-H pylori antibody titers were observed in 0.3% of the low-negative-titer group, 11.7% of the high-negative-titer group, 18.9% of the low-positive-titer group and 2.2% of the high-positive-titer group. Surprisingly, false diagnoses based on antibody titers were noted in 63.2% of patients with a low positive titer and a Kyoto score of 0 and in 62.5% of patients with a high negative titer and a Kyoto score ≥2, respectively. Conclusions: Endoscopic findings could predict false diagnoses determined using serum antibody titers.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Nishizawa, T., Sakitani, K., Suzuki, H., Yamakawa, T., Takahashi, Y., Yamamichi, N., … Toyoshima, O. (2019). A combination of serum anti-Helicobacter pylori antibody titer and Kyoto classification score could provide a more accurate diagnosis of H pylori. United European Gastroenterology Journal, 7(3), 343–348. https://doi.org/10.1177/2050640619825947

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free