RESUMEN
In this editorial, we discuss the article in the World Journal of Gastroenterology. The article conducts a meta-analysis of the diagnostic accuracy of the urea breath test (UBT), a non-invasive method for detecting Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) infection in humans. It is based on radionuclide-labeled urea. Various methods, both invasive and non-invasive, are available for diagnosing H. pylori infection, including endoscopy with biopsy, serology for immunoglobulin titers, stool antigen analysis, and UBT. Several guidelines recommend UBTs as the primary choice for diagnosing H. pylori infection and for reexamining after eradication therapy. It is used to be the first choice non-invasive test due to their high accuracy, specificity, rapid results, and simplicity. Moreover, its performance remains unaffected by the distribution of H. pylori in the stomach, allowing a high flow of patients to be tested. Despite its widespread use, the performance characteristics of UBT have been inconsistently described and remain incompletely defined. There are two UBTs available with Food and Drug Administration approval: The 13C and 14C tests. Both tests are affordable and can provide real-time results. Physicians may prefer the 13C test because it is non-radioactive, compared to 14C which uses a radioactive isotope, especially in young children and pregnant women. Although there was heterogeneity among the studies regarding the diagnostic accuracy of both UBTs, 13C-UBT consistently outperforms the 14C-UBT. This makes the 13C-UBT the preferred diagnostic approach. Furthermore, the provided findings of the meta-analysis emphasize the significance of precise considerations when choosing urea dosage, assessment timing, and measurement techniques for both the 13C-UBT and 14C-UBT, to enhance diagnostic precision.
