TABLE 2.
Diagnosis of H. pylori infection
| Diagnostic method | Sensitivity and specificitya | Typical application | Remarks |
|---|---|---|---|
| Invasive methods | |||
| Histology | >95% | “Gold standard” in routine hospital diagnostics | Requires expert pathologist; also provides histological data on inflammation and atrophy |
| Culture biopsy | >95% | Alternative gold standard | Allows for testing of antimicrobial sensitivity; requires specific microbiological expertise |
| Rapid urease (CLO) test | >90% | Cost-effective and rapid test | Requires an additional test for confirmation of H. pylori infection |
| Noninvasive methods | |||
| Urea breath test | >95% | Alternative gold standard | Very useful, reliable test to evaluate success of eradication treatment of H. pylori; limited availability due to requirement of expensive equipment |
| Fecal antigen test | >90% | Not widely used yet | Simple test but may not be reliable for evaluation of success of eradication treatment of H. pylori |
| Serology | 80-90% | Mainly used for epidemiological studies | Insufficient reliability for routine screening; cannot prove ongoing infection due to immunological memory |
a
Global range, depending on regional variations and subjects.