Evaluation of two commercially available rapid stool antigen tests for the diagnosis of Helicobacter pylori infection.

INTRODUCTION: Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) is one of the most prevalent infections, which can cause chronic gastritis, peptic ulcers and even gastric cancer. Prompt diagnosis and subsequent eradication are essential. Many commercially available H. pylori stool antigen diagnostic kits are used. However, the diagnostic performance of these tests has not yet been evaluated. This study aimed to evaluate two commercial rapid H. pylori Stool Antigen-Lateral Flow Immunochromatography Assay kits (HpSA-LFIA). METHODOLOGY: A total of 88 adult patients with dyspeptic symptoms were included in the study. Full case history was obtained, and fresh stool samples were tested for HpSA by two different kits: RightSign® (BiotesT, Hangzhou, China) and OnSite® (CTK biotech, Poway, USA) and HpSA-enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) as a reference standard. RESULTS: Of the 88 patients, H. pylori infection was positive in 32 (36.4%), negative in 53 (60.2%), and indeterminate in 3 (3.4%) by ELISA. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value were as follows: 96.6%, 66.1%, 62%, and 97.4%, respectively for RightSign® test and 96.9%, 50%, 52.5%, and 96.6%, respectively for OnSite® test. CONCLUSIONS: HpSA-LFIA, RightSign® and OnSite®, are good negative tests, however they cannot be used as a sole test for diagnosis and needs other confirmatory tests in case of positive results.

Hepatitis C Virus: Efficacy of New DAAs Regimens.

BACKGROUND: HCV treatment showed dramatical change due to the introduction of potent, strong, direct antiviral drugs. Before the appearance of Direct-acting antivirals, multiple therapeutic interventions were used for hepatitis C, but none of these interventions were effective on patient-centered outcomes. Direct-acting antivirals cause disruption of viral replication because they target specific nonstructural viral proteins. AIM: To review the advantages of efficient HCV therapy and its long term drawbacks. METHODS: A search of the literature published in indexed databases (PubMed, Medline In-Process, and Embase) within the last 5 years was conducted. Any duplicated citations were excluded before first-pass screening. Citations (titles and abstracts) were screened for eligibility by a single reviewer. Full texts (including congress abstracts, posters and other congress communications) of citations deemed relevant during title and abstract screening were retrieved for second-pass review. RESULTS: Studies on the clinical effects of DAAs for hepatitis C show better tolerance, improved survival and fewer complications when compared to previous interferon therapy. CONCLUSION: HCV treatment has improved dramatically. Since that time, there are multiple approved oral therapies all with high efficacy. The most important factor which should be considered during choosing appropriate therapy is to ensure that it covers the viral genotype of the infected patients.