Trial reportBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2002
Randomised trial of endoscopy with testing for Helicobacter pylori compared with non-invasive H pylori testing alone in the management of dyspepsia.
Trial report in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2002. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 29 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
29 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 164 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effectiveness of management strategies for uninvestigated dyspepsia: systematic review and network meta-analysis.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2019Pooled it
- ACG and CAG Clinical Guideline: Management of Dyspepsia.The American journal of gastroenterology · 2017Guideline
- Efficacy of a new therapeutic regimen versus two routinely prescribed treatments for eradication of Helicobacter pylori: a randomized, double-blind study of doxycycline, co-amoxiclav, and omeprazole in Iranian patients.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2009Trial
- Limited impact on endoscopy demand from a primary care based 'test and treat' dyspepsia management strategy: the results of a randomised controlled trial.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2006Trial
- Trial
- Empirical prescribing for dyspepsia: randomised controlled trial of test and treat versus omeprazole treatment.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2003Trial
- Gastroscopy for dyspeptic symptoms in patients <65 years has a low yield of clinically important findings: a retrospective study.Journal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology · 2024Article
- Diagnostic Value of Fecal Calprotectin in Children with Gastritis, Duodenitis and Helicobacter Pylori.International journal of preventive medicine · 2022Article
- Article
- Prevention of overuse: A view on upper gastrointestinal endoscopy.World journal of gastroenterology · 2019Review
- The diagnosis and management of H. pylori infection in Singapore.Singapore medical journal · 2017Article
- Early Diagnosis ofGastroenterology research and practice · 2017Article
- Repeat upper gastrointestinal endoscopy in patients with functional dyspepsia: yield, findings, and predictors of positive findings.Gastroenterology research and practice · 2015Article
- Helicobacter Pylori "Test-and-Treat" Strategy for Management of Dyspepsia: A Comprehensive Review.Clinical and translational gastroenterology · 2013Article
- Rate and yield of repeat upper endoscopy in patients with dyspepsia.World journal of gastroenterology · 2010Article
- Clinical practice: diagnosis and evaluation of dyspepsia.Journal of clinical gastroenterology · 2010Review
- Evaluation and management of dyspepsia.Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology · 2010Article
- Managing dyspepsia.Current gastroenterology reports · 2009Review
- Helicobacter pylori detection and antimicrobial susceptibility testing.Clinical microbiology reviews · 2007Review
- Validity and cost comparison of 14carbon urea breath test for diagnosis of H Pylori in dyspeptic patients.World journal of gastroenterology · 2007Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Erratum issued
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo 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.
designRandomised controlled trial with follow up at 12 months.
settingHospital gastroenterology unit.
participants708 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 measureGlasgow dyspepsia severity score at one year. Use of medical resources, patient oriented outcomes, and safety were also assessed.
resultsIn 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.
conclusionIn 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.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.