Israel Medical Association Journal

Background: Screening for celiac disease is based on the sequential evaluation of serologic tests and intestinal biopsy; an optimal screening protocol is still under investigation. The screening policy of one of the main healthcare providers in Israel (Maccabi) consists of measuring total immunoglobulin A and tissue transglutaminase IgA[1] antibodies and confirming positive results by endomysial antibodies. For IgA-deficient patients antigliadin IgG is measured.

Objectives: To evaluate the use of tTGA[2] as a first-level screening test in patients suspected of having celiac disease

Methods: The results of tTGA and EMA[3] tests over a 3 month period were obtained from the laboratory computer. Letters were sent to the referring physicians of patients with positive tests, requesting clinical information and small intestinal biopsy results. tTGA was performed using an anti-guinea pig tTG-IgA enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay kit.

Results: Overall, 2,505 tTGA tests were performed: 216 (8.6%) were tTGA-positive of which 162 (75%) were EMA-negative (group 1) and 54 (25%) EMA-positive (group 2). Clinical information was obtained for 91 patients in group 1 and 32 in group 2. Small intestinal biopsy was performed in 33 (36%) and 27 patients (84%) in groups 1 and 2, respectively. Celiac disease was diagnosed in 4 biopsies (12%) in group 1 and 23 (85%) in group 2 (P < 0.0001). The positive predictive value was 45% for tTGA and 85% for EMA.

Conclusions: Symptomatic patients with positive tTGA and negative EMA have a low rate of celiac disease compared to those who are tTGA-positive and EMA-positive. Confirmation with EMA is advised when tTGA is performed as a first-level screening for suspected celiac disease.

Background: Current treatment for the eradication of Helicobacter pylori in patients with peptic disease is based on the combination of antibiotic and anti-acid regimens. Multiple combinations have been investigated, however no consensus has been reached regarding the optimal duration and medica­tions.

Objectives: To assess the efficacy of two treatment regimens in patients with peptic ulcer disease and non-ulcer dyspepsia, and to determine the need for gastric mucosal culture in patients failing previous treatment.

Methods: Ninety patients with established peptic ulcer and NUD (with previously proven ulcer) were randomly assigned to receive either bismuth-subcitrate, amoxycillin and metrnida­zole (8AM) or lansoprasole, clarithromycine and metronida­zole (LCM) for 7 days. Patients with active peptic disease were treated with ranitidine 300 mg/day for an additional month.

Results: Eradication failed in 8 of the 42 patients in the 8AM group and in 2 of the 43 patients in the LCM group, as determined by the ¹³C urea breath test or rapid urease test (19% vs. 5%, respectively, P=0.05). Five of these 10 patients were randomly assigned to treatment with lansoprazole, amoxycillin and clarithromycin (LAC) regardless of the culture obtained, and the other 5 patients were assigned to treatment with lansoprazole and two antibacterial agents chosen according to a susceptibility test. Eradication of H. pylon was confirmed by the ‘³C urea breath test. The same protocol (LAC) was used in all patients in the first group and in four of the five patients in the second group. The culture results did not influence the treatment protocol employed.

Conclusions: Combination therapy based on proton pump inhibitor and two antibiotics is superior to bismuth-based therapy for one week. Gastric-mucosal culture testing for sensitivity of H. pylon to antibiotics is probably unnecessary before the initiation of therapy for patients with eradication failure.