Evaluation of the diagnostic performance and the utility of Helicobacter pylori stool antigen lateral immunochromatography assay
Helicobacter pylori causes the most common human gastric infection. H. pylori Stool Antigen Lateral Flow Immunochromatography assay (HpSA-LFIA) is considered one of the most cost-effective and rapid non-invasive assays (active tests). Evaluating HpSA-LFIA is of crucial for ensuring accuracy and util...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Heliyon 2022-03, Vol.8 (3), p.e09189, Article e09189 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | Helicobacter pylori causes the most common human gastric infection. H. pylori Stool Antigen Lateral Flow Immunochromatography assay (HpSA-LFIA) is considered one of the most cost-effective and rapid non-invasive assays (active tests). Evaluating HpSA-LFIA is of crucial for ensuring accuracy and utility assurance. This study aimed to evaluate the polyclonal antibody-based HpSA-LFIA in comparison to a monoclonal antibody-based ELISA kit.
Stool samples were collected from 200 gastric patients for HpSA-LFIA and semiquantitative HpSA-ELISA tests. A statistical analysis of the diagnostic performance was performed using MedCalc software. Chi-square tests were performed to determine the effects of gender and age.
The results showed that HpSA-LFIA achieved remarkable sensitivity (93.75%) and NPV (98.00%). However, it had poor specificity, PPV, and accuracy of 59.76%, 31.25%, and 65.31%, respectively. LR+ and LR-were 2.33% & 0.1%, respectively. Gender didn't affect the diagnostic performance of HpSA-LFIA. Age groups had irrelevant sensitivity; however, specificity was significantly higher in patients aged >45 years. We can conclude that HpSA-LFIA was not accurate enough to be the sole test for diagnosis and suggest developing other confirmatory tests in case of positive conditions.
HpSA; H. pylori; Diagnostic performance; Sensitivity; Specificity; Accuracy; PPV; NPV. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 2405-8440 2405-8440 |
DOI: | 10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e09189 |