Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

The Predictive Performance of Contemporary Guideline Recommendations for Helicobacter pylori Testing in a United States Population.

BACKGROUND: The Houston Consensus Conference and American College of Gastroenterology (ACG) have recommended Helicobacter pylori screening in United States (U.S.) populations with specific risk factors. However, the performance of these guidelines in clinical practice is not known.

METHODS: We identified consecutive patients undergoing upper endoscopy with gastric biopsies for any indication in a safety-net hospital in Houston, TX during 1/2015-12/2016. We tested the association between the presence of H. pylori (histopathology, stool antigen, urea breath test, IgG serology, or prior treatment) and H. pylori risk factors using logistic regression models, reported as odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). We evaluated the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) for predictive ability of individual risk factors identified by the Houston Consensus Conference and ACG.

RESULTS: Of 942 patients, the prevalence of H. pylori infection was 51.5%. The risk factors with the highest predictive performance included first-generation immigrant (AUROC 0.59) and Hispanic or Black race/ethnicity (AUROC 0.57) while the remaining 7 risk factors/statements had low predictive value. A model that combined first-generation immigrant status, Black or Hispanic race/ethnicity, dyspepsia and reflux had higher predictive ability for H. pylori infection (AUROC 0.64, 95% CI 0.61-0.68) than any individual risk factor.

CONCLUSION: In this contemporary U.S. cohort, the performance of individual risk factors identified by the Houston Consensus Conference and ACG was generally low for predicting H. pylori infection, except for Black or Hispanic race/ethnicity and first-generation immigrant status. A risk prediction model combining several risk factors had improved diagnostic performance and should be validated in future studies.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app