Diagnostic accuracy of the Oakland score versus haemoglobin for predicting outcomes in lower gastrointestinal bleeding.

BACKGROUND: Acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding (ALGIB) is a common cause of hospitalization. Recent guidelines recommend the use of prognostic scales for risk stratification. However, it remains unclear whether risk scores are more accurate than some simpler prognostic variables. OBJECTIVE: To compare the predictive values of haemoglobin alone and the Oakland score for predicting outcomes in ALGIB patients. DESIGN: Single-centre, retrospective study at a University Hospital. Data were extracted from the hospital's clinical records. The Oakland score was calculated at admission. Study outcomes were defined according to the original article describing the Oakland score: safe discharge (the primary Oakland score outcome), transfusion, rebleeding, readmission, therapeutic intervention and death. Area under the receiver operating characteristics (AUROC) curve and accuracy using haemoglobin and the Oakland score were calculated for each outcome. RESULTS: Two hundred and fifty-eight patients were included. Eighty-four (32.6%) needed transfusion, 50 (19.4%) presented rebleeding, 31 (12.1%) required therapeutic intervention, 20 (7.8%) were readmitted and six (2.3%) died. There were no differences in the AUROC curve values for haemoglobin versus the Oakland score with regard to safe discharge (0.82 (0.77-0.88) vs 0.80 (0.74-0.86), respectively) or to therapeutic intervention and death. Haemoglobin was significantly better for predicting transfusion and rebleeding, and the Oakland score was significantly better for predicting readmission. CONCLUSION: In our study, the Oakland score did not perform better than haemoglobin alone for predicting the outcome of patients with ALGIB. The usefulness of risk scores for predicting outcomes in clinical practice remains uncertain.

Economic impact of inflammatory bowel disease in Catalonia: a population-based analysis.

Background: Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) has a major economic impact on healthcare costs. Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate the current healthcare expenditure associated with IBD in a population-wide study in Catalonia. Design: Retrospective observational study. Methods: All patients with IBD included in the Catalan Health Surveillance System (CHSS) were considered eligible. The CHSS compiles data on more than 7 million individuals in 2020 (34,823 with IBD). Data on the use of healthcare resources and its economic impact were extracted applying the International Classification of Diseases, 10th revision, Clinical Modification codes (ICD-10-CM codes). Health expenditure, comorbidities, and hospitalization were calculated according to the standard costs of each service provided by the Department of Health of the Catalan government. The data on the IBD population were compared with non-IBD population adjusted for age, sex, and income level. IBD costs were recorded separately for Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC). Results: Prevalence of comorbidities was higher in patients with IBD than in those without. The risk of hospitalization was twice as high in the IBD population. The overall healthcare expenditure on IBD patients amounted to 164M€. The pharmacy cost represents the 60%. The average annual per capita expenditure on IBD patients was more than 3.4-fold higher (IBD 4200€, non-IBD 1200€). Average costs of UC were 3400€ and 5700€ for CD. Conclusion: The risk of comorbidities was twice as high in patients with IBD and their use of healthcare resources was also higher than that of their non-IBD counterparts. Per capita healthcare expenditure was approximately 3.4 times higher in the population with IBD. Trial registration: The study was not previously registered.

Economic impact of inflammatory bowel disease in Catalonia The manuscript includes data of the most recent epidemiologic data about the high economic impact of IBD in Catalonia.

Riesgos, indicaciones y aspectos técnicos de la colonoscopia en pacientes de edad avanzada o con fragilidad. Documento de posicionamiento de la Societat Catalana de Digestologia, la Societat Catalana de Geriatria i Gerontologia i la Societat Catalana de Medicina de Familia i Comunitaria / Risks, indications and technical aspects of colonoscopy in elderly or frail patients. Position paper of the Societat Catalana de Digestologia, the Societat Catalana de Geriatria i Gerontologia and the Societat Catalana de Medicina de Familia i Comunitaria

La colonoscopia (CS) es una técnica invasiva, fundamental para el estudio del colon. Es un procedimiento seguro y bien tolerado. Sin embargo, en personas de edad avanzada o con fragilidad (PEA/F) aumenta el riesgo de acontecimientos adversos, preparación insuficiente o exploraciones incompletas. El objetivo de este documento de posicionamiento fue consensuar recomendaciones sobre valoración del riesgo, indicaciones y cuidados especiales necesarios para la CS en PEA/F. El documento fue redactado por un grupo de expertos designados por la SCD, la SCGiG y la CAMFiC entre 2020 y 2022. Se consensuaron 8 afirmaciones y recomendaciones, entre ellas: no realizar CS a los pacientes con fragilidad avanzada, indicar CS solo si los beneficios son claramente superiores a los riesgos en fragilidad moderada, no repetir CS en PEA/F que tienen una CS completa previa sin lesiones y no indicar CS de cribado en pacientes con fragilidad moderada o avanzada (AU)

Colonoscopy (CS) is an invasive diagnostic and therapeutic technique, allowing the study of the colon. It is a safe and well tolerated procedure. However, CS is associated with an increased risk of adverse events, insufficient preparation and incomplete examinations in the elderly or frail patient (PEA/F). The objective of this position paper was to develop a set of recommendations on risk assessment, indications and special care required for CS in the PEA/F. It was drafted by a group of experts appointed by the SCD, SCGiG and CAMFiC that agreed on eight statements and recommendations, between them to recommend against performing CS in patients with advanced frailty, to indicate CS only if the benefits clearly outweigh the risks in moderate frailty and to avoid repeating CS in patients with a previous normal procedure. We also recommended against performing screening CS in patients with moderate or advanced frailty (AU)

Risks, indications and technical aspects of colonoscopy in elderly or frail patients. Position paper of the Societat Catalana de Digestologia, the Societat Catalana de Geriatria i Gerontologia and the Societat Catalana de Medicina de Familia i Comunitaria. / Riesgos, indicaciones y aspectos técnicos de la colonoscopia en pacientes de edad avanzada o con fragilidad. Documento de posicionamiento de la Societat Catalana de Digestologia, la Societat Catalana de Geriatria i Gerontologia i la Societat Catalana de Medicina de Familia i Comunitaria.

Colonoscopy (CS) is an invasive diagnostic and therapeutic technique, allowing the study of the colon. It is a safe and well tolerated procedure. However, CS is associated with an increased risk of adverse events, insufficient preparation and incomplete examinations in the elderly or frail patient (PEA/F). The objective of this position paper was to develop a set of recommendations on risk assessment, indications and special care required for CS in the PEA/F. It was drafted by a group of experts appointed by the SCD, SCGiG and CAMFiC that agreed on eight statements and recommendations, between them to recommend against performing CS in patients with advanced frailty, to indicate CS only if the benefits clearly outweigh the risks in moderate frailty and to avoid repeating CS in patients with a previous normal procedure. We also recommended against performing screening CS in patients with moderate or advanced frailty.

Úlcera péptica / Peptic ulcer

La enfermedad ulcerosa péptica es una patología frecuente; aunque su incidencia ha disminuido en los últimos años, sigue siendo una causa importante de morbimortalidad asociada a un elevado gasto sanitario. Los factores de riesgo más importantes son la infección por Helicobacter pylori(H. pylori) y el uso de antiinflamatorios no esteroideos. La mayoría de los pacientes con enfermedad ulcerosa péptica permanecen asintomáticos, siendo la clínica más frecuente la dispepsia, a menudo característica (dispepsia ulcerosa). También puede comenzar con complicaciones como hemorragia digestiva alta, perforación o estenosis. La técnica diagnóstica de elección es la endoscopia digestiva alta. El tratamiento con inhibidores de la bomba de protones, la erradicación de H. pylori y evitar el consumo de antiinflamatorios no esteroideos son la base del tratamiento. Sin embargo, la prevención es la mejor estrategia, incluye una adecuada indicación de inhibidores de la bomba de protones, la investigación y tratamiento de H. pylori, evitar los antiinflamatorios no esteroideos o utilizar aquellos menos gastrolesivos (AU)

Peptic ulcer disease is a frequent pathology; although the incidence has decreased in recent years, it continues to be an important cause of morbidity and mortality associated with high healthcare costs. The most important risk factors are Helicobacter pylori(H. pylori) infection and the use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. Most patients with peptic ulcer disease remain asymptomatic, with dyspepsia being the most frequent and often characteristic symptom. It can also debut with complications such as upper gastrointestinal bleeding, perforation or stenosis. The diagnostic technique of choice is upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. Treatment with proton pump inhibitors, eradication of H. pylori and avoiding the use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs are the basis of treatment. However, prevention is the best strategy, it includes an adequate indication of proton pump inhibitors, investigation and treatment of H. pylori, avoiding non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs or using those that are less gastrolesive (AU)

[Peptic ulcer]. / Úlcera péptica.

Peptic ulcer disease is a frequent pathology; although the incidence has decreased in recent years, it continues to be an important cause of morbidity and mortality associated with high healthcare costs. The most important risk factors are Helicobacter pylori(H. pylori) infection and the use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. Most patients with peptic ulcer disease remain asymptomatic, with dyspepsia being the most frequent and often characteristic symptom. It can also debut with complications such as upper gastrointestinal bleeding, perforation or stenosis. The diagnostic technique of choice is upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. Treatment with proton pump inhibitors, eradication of H. pylori and avoiding the use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs are the basis of treatment. However, prevention is the best strategy, it includes an adequate indication of proton pump inhibitors, investigation and treatment of H. pylori, avoiding non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs or using those that are less gastrolesive.

Heterogeneity in pharmacological treatment and outcomes in Crohn's disease patients in Catalonia: a population-based observational study.

BACKGROUND: Heterogeneity in the treatment of a disease is a marker of suboptimal quality of care. The aim of this study is to evaluate the heterogeneity in the treatment used and the outcomes for Crohn's disease (CD) in Catalonia. METHODS: All patients with CD included in the Catalan Health Surveillance System (data on more than seven million individuals from 2011 to 2017) were identified. The different Catalonian health areas were grouped into 19 district groups (DG). Treatments used rates (systemic corticosteroids, non-biological and biological immunosuppressant) and outcomes rates (hospitalization and surgery) were calculated. RESULTS: The use of systemic corticosteroids presented a decreasing trend over the study period, with an average rate of use in the different territories between 11% and 17%. The use of non-biological immunosuppressant treatment has remained stable, with an average rate of use ranging from 22% to 40% per year depending on the DG. The use of biological immunosuppressant treatment increased with an average rate of use in the different territories ranging from 10 to 23%.Hospitalizations for any reason showed an increasing trend between 2011 and 2017 with an average rate of between 23% and 32% per year depending on the area. Hospitalizations for CD presented a decreasing trend, with an average rate of between 5% and 11% per year. Surgical treatment remained stable over time, rates per year were between 0.5% and 2%. CONCLUSION: A remarkable geographical heterogeneity in the use of different treatments and in outcomes of CD was observed between different geographical areas of Catalonia. KEY MESSAGEThere is a notable geographical heterogeneity in the administration of biological and immunosuppressive treatments to Crohn's disease patients in Catalonia.There is also a geographical heterogeneity in their rates of hospitalization and surgical intervention.

Comparable quality of bowel preparation with single-day versus three-day low-residue diet: Randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: There is controversy about the length of low-residue diet (LRD) for colonoscopy preparation. The aim of the study was to compare one-day vs. three-day LRD associated to standard laxative treatment for achieving an adequate colonoscopy preparation in average risk subjects with positive fecal immunochemical test undergoing screening colonoscopy. METHODS: A non-inferiority, randomized, controlled, parallel-group clinical trial was performed in the setting of average risk colorectal cancer screening program. Participants were randomized to receive 1-day vs. 3-day LRD in addition to standard polyethilenglicol treatment. Adequacy of preparation was evaluated using the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS). Primary outcome was achieving a BBPS ≥ 2 in all colon segments. Analysis was performed for a non-inferiority margin of 5%, a 95% statistical power and one-sided 0.05 significance level. RESULTS: A total of 855 patients were randomized. Adequate bowel preparation was similar between groups: 97.9% of patients in the 1-day LRD group vs 96.9% in the 3-day LRD group achieved the primary outcome (P-value for non-inferiority < 0.001). The percentage of patients with BBPS scores ≥ 8 was superior in the 1-day LRD group (254 vs 221 in the 3-day LRD group, P = 0.032). The 1-day regimen was better tolerated than the 3-day diet. 47.7% (vs 28.7%, P < 0.05) of patients rated the 1-day LRD as very easy to follow. CONCLUSION: The 1-day LRD is non-inferior to 3-day LRD for achieving an adequate colon cleansing before average risk screening colonoscopy and it is better tolerated.

Time Trends of Crohn's Disease in Catalonia from 2011 to 2017. Increasing Use of Biologics Correlates with a Reduced Need for Surgery.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Data from clinical trials suggest that biological drugs may improve the outcomes in Crohn's disease (CD) by reducing the need for surgery or hospitalization. The aim of this study is to evaluate the time-trends of the use of biological drugs and other treatments for CD, and its relationship with outcomes in Catalonia. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All patients with CD included in the Catalan Health Surveillance System (containing data on a population of more than 7.5 million) from 2011 to 2017 were identified. The exposures to different treatments for inflammatory bowel disease were retrieved from electronic invoicing records. RESULTS: Between 2011 and 2017, the use of salicylates, corticosteroids and immunosuppressive treatment fell from 28.8% to 17.1%, 15.8% to 13.7%, and 32.9% to 29.6%, respectively (p < 0.001). Biological treatment use rose from 15.0% to 18.7% (p < 0.001). Ostomy rates per 1000 patients/year fell from 13.2 in 2011 to 9.8 in 2017 (p = 0.003), and surgical resection rates from 24.1 to 18.0 (p < 0.001). The rate of CD-related hospitalizations per 1000 patients/year also fell, from 92.7 to 72.2 (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Biological drug use rose from 15.0% to 18.7% between 2011 and 2017. During this period, we observed an improvement in the outcomes of CD patients.

Endoscopist's Judgment Is as Useful as Risk Scores for Predicting Outcome in Peptic Ulcer Bleeding: A Multicenter Study.

Background: Guidelines recommend using prognostic scales for risk stratification in patients with non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding. It remains unclear whether risk scores offer greater accuracy than clinical evaluation. Objective: Compare the diagnostic accuracy of the endoscopist's judgment against different risk-scoring systems (Rockall, Glasgow-Blatchford, Baylor and the Cedars-Sinai scores) for predicting outcomes in peptic ulcer bleeding (PUB). Methods: Between February 2006 and April 2010 we prospectively recruited 401 patients with peptic ulcer bleeding; 225 received endoscopic treatment. The endoscopist recorded his/her subjective assessment ("endoscopist judgment") of the risk of rebleeding and death immediately after endoscopy for each patient. Independent evaluators calculated the different scores. Area under the receiver-operating-characteristics (ROC) curve, sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values were calculated for rebleeding and mortality. Results: The areas under ROC curve of the endoscopist's clinical judgment for rebleeding (0.67-0.75) and mortality (0.84-0.9) were similar or even superior to the different risk scores in both the whole group and in patients receiving endoscopic therapy. Conclusions: The accuracy of the currently available risk scores for predicting rebleeding and mortality in PUB patients was moderate and not superior to the endoscopist's judgment. More precise prognostic scales are needed.

Púrpura trombocitopénica inmune asociada a enfermedad de Crohn con respuesta completa a infliximab / Immune thrombocytopenic purpura associated with Crohn's disease with complete response to infliximab

No disponible

Eficacia diagnóstica de la sonda nasogástrica y de la relación nitrógeno ureico en sangre (BUN)/creatinina para distinguir el origen alto o bajo de la hemorragia digestiva / Diagnostic utility of nasogastric tube aspiration and the ratio of blood urea nitrogen to creatinine for distinguishing upper and lower gastrointestinal tract bleeding

Objetivo. La guía clínica para el tratamiento de la hemorragia digestiva (HD) baja del American College of Gastroenterology publicada en el año 2016 defiende la valoración del aspirado por sonda nasogástrica (SNG) y la evaluación de la relación nitrógeno ureico en sangre (BUN)/creatinina para diferenciar el origen alto o bajo de la HD. Sin embargo, la recomendación de ambas se realiza con un grado de evidencia bajo. El objetivo de este estudio es evaluar la eficacia diagnóstica del aspirado por SNG y la relación BUN/creatinina para diferenciar el origen de una HD. Métodos. Se realizó una revisión sistemática de la literatura para identificar los estudios que evalúan la precisión diagnóstica de la relación BUN/creatinina y el aspirado por SNG en pacientes con HD sin hematemesis. Resultados. Ambos métodos tienen una baja sensibilidad para detectar un sangrado digestivo alto. Tanto el aspirado hemático como la relación BUN/creatinina elevada aumentan significativamente la probabilidad de una HD alta. La razón de verosimilitud positiva varía de 2 a 11. Sin embargo, la sensibilidad de ambas pruebas para la HD alta fue muy baja (razón de verosimilitud negativa alrededor de 0,6). Conclusiones. Un resultado negativo en cualquiera de las dos pruebas proporciona poca información y no permite descartar con seguridad una HD alta. Por ello, no se puede recomendar el uso del aspirado por SNG para descartar un origen alto de la HD. Si existe duda diagnóstica es necesario la realización de una endoscopia digestiva alta

Background and objective. The American College of Gastroenterology's 2016 clinical guidelines for treating lower gastrointestinal (GI) tract bleeding recommends evaluating of nasogastric tube aspiration and the ratio of blood urea nitrogen (BUN) to creatinine to differentiate upper from lower GI bleeds. However, the evidence base to support recommending these 2 diagnostic variables is low. This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic utility of nasogastric tube aspiration and the BUN-to-creatinine ratio for distinguishing between upper and lower GI bleeding. Methods. We conducted a systematic review of the literature to find studies reporting the diagnostic precision of the BUN-to-creatinine ratio and nasogastric aspiration in patients with GI bleeding without hematemesis. Results. The sensitivity of both methods is low for detecting upper GI bleeding. Both blood in the aspirate and an elevated BUN-to-creatinine ratio significantly increase the probability of finding an upper GI source. The positive likelihood ratio varies from positive 2 to 11. However, the sensitivity of both tests for a diagnosis of upper GI bleeding is very low (negative likelihood ratio of 0.6). Conclusions. A negative result on either of the 2 diagnostic tests provides little useful information and does not firmly rule out an upper GI bleed. Nasogastric tube aspiration cannot be recommended for distinguishing between upper and lower GI bleeding. If the diagnosis is in doubt, endoscopic exploration of the upper GI tract is necessary

Actualización en el manejo de la infección por Helicobacter pylori. Documento de posicionamiento de la Societat Catalana de Digestologia / Update on the management of Helicobacter pylori infection. Position paper from the Catalan Society of Digestology

Más de 30 años después de su descubrimiento, la infección por Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori)sigue siendo la causa más frecuente de enfermedades gástricas y duodenales. H. pylori es la causa principal de la gastritis crónica, la úlcera péptica, el linfoma MALT gástrico y el adenocarcinoma gástrico. Recientemente se han publicado varios consensos sobre el manejo de la infección por H. pylori. Las líneas generales del consenso español, del de Toronto y el Maastricht V del 2016 son similares, pero las recomendaciones concretas pueden variar notablemente. Además, las recomendaciones de alguno de estos consensos resultan francamente complejas. El presente documento de posicionamiento de la Societat Catalana de Digestologia es una actualización de las recomendaciones basadas en la evidencia sobre el manejo y tratamiento de la infección por H. pylori. Este documento pretende revisar esta información para hacer unas recomendaciones para la práctica clínica habitual sencillas, concretas y que sean de fácil aplicación en nuestro medio

More than 30 years after its discovery, Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) infection remains the most common cause of gastric and duodenal diseases. H. pylori is the leading cause of chronic gastritis, peptic ulcer, gastric MALT lymphoma and gastric adenocarcinoma. Several consensuses have recently been published on the management of H. pylori infection. The general guidelines of the Spanish consensus, the Toronto Consensus and the Maastricht V Consensus of 2016 are similar but concrete recommendations can vary significantly. In addition, the recommendations of some of these consensuses are decidedly complex. This position paper from the Catalan Society of Digestology is an update of evidence-based recommendations on the management and treatment of H. pylori infection. The aim of this document is to review this information in order to make recommendations for routine clinical practice that are simple, specific and easily applied to our setting

Update on the management of Helicobacter pylori infection. Position paper from the Catalan Society of Digestology. / Actualización en el manejo de la infección por Helicobacter pylori. Documento de posicionamiento de la Societat Catalana de Digestologia.

More than 30 years after its discovery, Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) infection remains the most common cause of gastric and duodenal diseases. H. pylori is the leading cause of chronic gastritis, peptic ulcer, gastric MALT lymphoma and gastric adenocarcinoma. Several consensuses have recently been published on the management of H. pylori infection. The general guidelines of the Spanish consensus, the Toronto Consensus and the Maastricht V Consensus of 2016 are similar but concrete recommendations can vary significantly. In addition, the recommendations of some of these consensuses are decidedly complex. This position paper from the Catalan Society of Digestology is an update of evidence-based recommendations on the management and treatment of H. pylori infection. The aim of this document is to review this information in order to make recommendations for routine clinical practice that are simple, specific and easily applied to our setting.

Diagnostic utility of nasogastric tube aspiration and the ratio of blood urea nitrogen to creatinine for distinguishing upper and lower gastrointestinal tract bleeding. / Eficacia diagnóstica de la sonda nasogástrica y de la relación nitrógeno ureico en sangre (BUN)/creatinina para distinguir el origen alto o bajo de la hemorragia digestiva.

OBJECTIVES: The American College of Gastroenterology's 2016 clinical guidelines for treating lower gastrointestinal (GI) tract bleeding recommends evaluating of nasogastric tube aspiration and the ratio of blood urea nitrogen (BUN) to creatinine to differentiate upper from lower GI bleeds. However, the evidence base to support recommending these 2 diagnostic variables is low. This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic utility of nasogastric tube aspiration and the BUN-to-creatinine ratio for distinguishing between upper and lower GI bleeding. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of the literature to find studies reporting the diagnostic precision of the BUN-to-creatinine ratio and nasogastric aspiration in patients with GI bleeding without hematemesis. RESULTS: The sensitivity of both methods is low for detecting upper GI bleeding. Both blood in the aspirate and an elevated BUN-to-creatinine ratio significantly increase the probability of finding an upper GI source. The positive likelihood ratio varies from positive 2 to 11. However, the sensitivity of both tests for a diagnosis of upper GI bleeding is very low (negative likelihood ratio of 0.6). CONCLUSION: A negative result on either of the 2 diagnostic tests provides little useful information and does not firmly rule out an upper GI bleed. Nasogastric tube aspiration cannot be recommended for distinguishing between upper and lower GI bleeding. If the diagnosis is in doubt, endoscopic exploration of the upper GI tract is necessary.

OBJETIVO: La guía clínica para el tratamiento de la hemorragia digestiva (HD) baja del American College of Gastroenterology publicada en el año 2016 defiende la valoración del aspirado por sonda nasogástrica (SNG) y la evaluación de la relación nitrógeno ureico en sangre (BUN)/creatinina para diferenciar el origen alto o bajo de la HD. Sin embargo, la recomendación de ambas se realiza con un grado de evidencia bajo. El objetivo de este estudio es evaluar la eficacia diagnóstica del aspirado por SNG y la relación BUN/creatinina para diferenciar el origen de una HD. METODO: Se realizó una revisión sistemática de la literatura para identificar los estudios que evalúan la precisión diagnóstica de la relación BUN/creatinina y el aspirado por SNG en pacientes con HD sin hematemesis. RESULTADOS: Ambos métodos tienen una baja sensibilidad para detectar un sangrado digestivo alto. Tanto el aspirado hemático como la relación BUN/creatinina elevada aumentan significativamente la probabilidad de una HD alta. La razón de verosimilitud positiva varía de 2 a 11. Sin embargo, la sensibilidad de ambas pruebas para la HD alta fue muy baja (razón de verosimilitud negativa alrededor de 0,6). CONCLUSIONES: Un resultado negativo en cualquiera de las dos pruebas proporciona poca información y no permite descartar con seguridad una HD alta. Por ello, no se puede recomendar el uso del aspirado por SNG para descartar un origen alto de la HD. Si existe duda diagnóstica es necesario la realización de una endoscopia digestiva alta.

Accuracy of the Ultra-Rapid Urease Test for diagnosis of Helicobacter pylori infection / Exactitud del test Ultra-Rapido de la Ureasa para el Diagnóstico de la infección por Helicobacter pylori

Background: Rapid Urease Test (RUT) is a simple, cheap and relatively fast method for diagnosing Helicobacter pylori infection. It is therefore the preferred method used for patients undergoing gastroscopy. Most kits require 24h to give results. The new Ultra-Rapid Urease Test (URUT) kit by Biohit(R) requires less than 1h. Objective: To determine URUT's diagnostic accuracy. Method: Prospective, blind, multi-centre study involving dyspeptic patients. One corpus biopsy and three antral biopsies were obtained during gastroscopy for standard histological analysis, RUT and URUT. The URUT result was checked after 1min, 5min, 30min and 60min and the RUT was checked over the course of 24h. Histology was used as the gold standard test. Results: 144 patients were included, 68% female, with a mean age of 49 years old; 50% were H. pyloripositive. RUT and URUT diagnoses were correct in 85.9% and 90% of the cases, respectively. The mean waiting time for a positive RUT result was 6h. The sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values for RUT were, respectively, 82%, 90%, 89% and 84%. The URUT's results were similar (85%, 94%, 94% and 87%). These figures improved when patients taking PPIs were excluded (RUT: 86%, 91%, 93% and 83%; URUT: 91%, 94%, 96% and 89%). No statistically significant differences were found when comparing RUT and URUT distributions of correct diagnoses (McNemar's Test, p=0.3) but there was a tendency towards better results with the URUT. Conclusion: The URUT is equivalent to (or slightly better than) the traditional RUT in diagnosing H. pyloriinfection, and provides results in less than an hour (AU)

Introducción: El test de la ureasa (TRU) es un método simple, barato y relativamente rápido para el diagnóstico de la infección por Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori). Por tanto, es el método de elección en pacientes sometidos a gastroscopia. La mayoría de los kits requieren 24 h para obtener un resultado. En nuevo test ultrarrápido de la ureasa (TURU) de Biohit requiere menos de una hora. Objetivo: Determinar la exactitud diagnóstica del TURU. Método: Estudio multicéntrico, prospectivo y ciego, en el que se incluyó a pacientes dispépticos. Se obtuvieron 3 biopsias de antro y una de corpus durante la gastroscopia para análisis histológico estándar, TRU y TURU. El resultado del TURU se comprobó a los 1, 5, 30 y 60 min, mientras que el TRU se evaluó a lo largo de 24 h. La histología se utilizó como patrón oro. Resultados: Se incluyó a 144 pacientes, 68% mujeres, edad media 49 años, el 50% fueron positivos para H. pylori. TRU y TURU diagnosticaron correctamente el 85,9% y 90,0% de los casos, respectivamente. La duración media de espera para un resultado positivo del TRU fue 6 h. La sensibilidad, la especificidad y los valores predictivos negativo y positivo para el TRU fueron, respectivamente, del 82, el 90, el 89 y el 84%. Los resultados del TURU fueron equivalentes (el 85, el 94, el 94 y el 87%). Estos resultados mejoraron al excluir los pacientes que tomaban IBP (TRU: 86, 91, 93 y 83%; TURU: 91, 94, 96 y 89%). La comparación de distribución de diagnósticos correctos entre TRU y TURU no encontró diferencias estadísticamente significativas (test de McNemar p=0,3) pero existe una tendencia a mejores resultados con el TURU. Conclusión: El TURU es equivalente (o algo superior) al TRU tradicional en el diagnóstico de la infección por H. pylori y obtiene los resultados en menos de una hora (AU)

Accuracy of the Ultra-Rapid Urease Test for diagnosis of Helicobacter pylori infection.

BACKGROUND: Rapid Urease Test (RUT) is a simple, cheap and relatively fast method for diagnosing Helicobacter pylori infection. It is therefore the preferred method used for patients undergoing gastroscopy. Most kits require 24h to give results. The new Ultra-Rapid Urease Test (URUT) kit by Biohit® requires less than 1h. OBJECTIVE: To determine URUT's diagnostic accuracy. METHOD: Prospective, blind, multi-centre study involving dyspeptic patients. One corpus biopsy and three antral biopsies were obtained during gastroscopy for standard histological analysis, RUT and URUT. The URUT result was checked after 1min, 5min, 30min and 60min and the RUT was checked over the course of 24h. Histology was used as the gold standard test. RESULTS: 144 patients were included, 68% female, with a mean age of 49 years old; 50% were H. pylori positive. RUT and URUT diagnoses were correct in 85.9% and 90% of the cases, respectively. The mean waiting time for a positive RUT result was 6h. The sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values for RUT were, respectively, 82%, 90%, 89% and 84%. The URUT's results were similar (85%, 94%, 94% and 87%). These figures improved when patients taking PPIs were excluded (RUT: 86%, 91%, 93% and 83%; URUT: 91%, 94%, 96% and 89%). No statistically significant differences were found when comparing RUT and URUT distributions of correct diagnoses (McNemar's Test, p=0.3) but there was a tendency towards better results with the URUT. CONCLUSION: The URUT is equivalent to (or slightly better than) the traditional RUT in diagnosing H. pylori infection, and provides results in less than an hour.