Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
K E L McColl a University Department of Medicine and
Therapeutics, Western Infirmary, Glasgow G11 6NT, b Robertson Institute, University of Glasgow, Glasgow G12
8QQ
Correspondence to: K McColl K.E.L.McColl{at}clinmed.gla.ac.uk
Objective:
To compare the efficacy of non-invasive
testing for Helicobacter pylori with that of endoscopy (plus
H pylori testing) in the management of patients referred for
endoscopic investigation of upper gastrointestinal symptoms.
What is already known on this topic
Non-invasive testing for Helicobacter pylori has been shown
to predict endoscopic diagnosis in patients with dyspepsia What this study adds
Non-invasive H pylori testing is as reassuring to the
patient as endoscopy and is less uncomfortable and distressing
Design:
Randomised controlled trial with follow up at
12 months.
Setting:
Hospital gastroenterology unit.
Participants:
708 patients aged under 55 referred for
endoscopic investigation of dyspepsia, randomised to non-invasive
breath test for H pylori or endoscopy plus H pylori
testing.
Main outcome measure:
Glasgow dyspepsia severity
score at one year. Use of medical resources, patient oriented outcomes,
and safety were also assessed.
Results:
In 586 patients followed up at 12 months the mean change in dyspepsia score was 4.8 in the non-invasive H
pylori test group and 4.6 in the endoscopy group (95% confidence
interval for difference -0.7 to 0.5, P=0.69). Only 8.2% of patients
followed up who were randomised to breath test alone were referred for subsequent endoscopy. The use of non-endoscopic resources was similar
in the two groups. Reassurance value, concern about missed pathology,
overall patient satisfaction, and quality of life were similar in the
two groups. The patients found the non-invasive breath test procedure
less uncomfortable and distressing than endoscopy with or without
sedation. No potentially serious pathology requiring treatment other
than eradication of H pylori was missed.
Conclusion:
In this patient group, non-invasive
testing for H pylori is as effective and safe as endoscopy
and less uncomfortable and distressing for the patient. Non-invasive
H pylori testing should be the preferred mode of investigation.
Endoscopy is a commonly used investigation for upper gastrointestinal
symptoms, but its effectiveness has been questioned
In patients less than 55 years of age with uncomplicated dyspepsia,
non-invasive testing for H pylori is as effective and as
safe as endoscopy
Read all Rapid Responses
What can you learn from this BMJ paper? Read Leanne Tite's Paper+