27 research outputs found

    Real-Time PCR Improves Helicobacter pylori Detection in Patients with Peptic Ulcer Bleeding

    Get PDF
    Background and aims: Histological and rapid urease tests to detect H. pylori in biopsy specimens obtained during peptic ulcer bleeding episodes (PUB) often produce false-negative results. We aimed to examine whether immunohistochemistry and real-time PCR can improve the sensitivity of these biopsies. Patients and Methods: We selected 52 histology-negative formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded biopsy specimens obtained during PUB episodes. Additional tests showed 10 were true negatives and 42 were false negatives. We also selected 17 histology-positive biopsy specimens obtained during PUB to use as controls. We performed immunohistochemistry staining and real-time PCR for 16S rRNA, ureA, and 23S rRNA for H. pylori genes on all specimens. Results: All controls were positive for H. pylori on all PCR assays and immunohistochemical staining. Regarding the 52 initially negative biopsies, all PCR tests were significantly more sensitive than immunohistochemical staining (p<0.01). Sensitivity and specificity were 55% and 80% for 16S rRNA PCR, 43% and 90% for ureA PCR, 41% and 80% for 23S rRNA PCR, and 7% and 100% for immunohistochemical staining, respectively. Combined analysis of PCR assays for two genes were significantly more sensitive than ureA or 23S rRNA PCR tests alone (p<0.05) and marginally better than 16S rRNA PCR alone. The best combination was 16S rRNA+ureA, with a sensitivity of 64% and a specificity of 80%. Conclusions: Real-time PCR improves the detection of H. pylori infection in histology-negative formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded biopsy samples obtained during PUB episodes. The low reported prevalence of H. pylori in PUB may be due to the failure of conventional tests to detect infection

    Programa de telerrehabilitación como estrategia de mantenimiento para pacientes con EPOC: un ensayo clínico aleatorizado de 12 meses

    No full text
    [EN] Background: There is uncertainty regarding efficacy of telehealth-based approaches in COPD patients for sustaining benefits achieved with intensive pulmonary rehabilitation (PR). Research question: To determine whether a maintenance pulmonary telerehabilitation (TelePR) programme, after intensive initial PR, is superior to usual care in sustaining over time benefits achieved by intensive PR. Study design and methods: A multicentre open-label pragmatic parallel-group randomized clinical trial was conducted. Two groups were created at completion of an 8-week intensive outpatient hospital PR programme. Intervention group (IG) patients were given appropriate training equipment and instructed to perform three weekly training sessions and send performance data through an app to a web-based platform. Patients in the control group (CG) were advised to exercise regularly (usual care). Results: Ninety-four patients (46 IG, 48 CG) were randomized. The analysis of covariance showed non-significant improvements in 6-min walk distance [19.9 m (95% CI −4.1/+43.8)] and Chronic Respiratory Disease Questionnaire – Emotion score [0.4 points (0–0.8)] in the IG. Secondary linear mixed models showed improvements in the IG in Short Form-36 mental component summary [9.7, (4.0–15.4)] and Chronic Respiratory Disease Questionnaire – Emotion [0.5, (0.2–0.9)] scores, but there was no association between compliance and outcomes. Acute exacerbations were associated with a marginally significant decrease in 6-minute walk distance of 15.8 m (−32.3/0.8) in linear models. Conclusions: The TelePR maintenance strategy was both feasible and safe but failed to show superiority over usual care, despite improvements in some HRQoL domains. Acute exacerbations may have an important negative influence on long-term physical function. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03247933.[ES] Contexto previo: Existe incertidumbre con respecto a la eficacia de los enfoques basados en telesalud en pacientes con enfermedad pulmonar obstructiva crónica (EPOC) para mantener los beneficios logrados con la rehabilitación pulmonar (RP) intensiva. Pregunta de investigación: Determinar si un programa de telerrehabilitación pulmonar de mantenimiento (TeleRP), después de una RP inicial intensiva, es superior a la atención habitual para mantener en el tiempo los beneficios logrados por la RP intensiva. Diseño del estudio y métodos: Se realizó un ensayo clínico aleatorizado, pragmático, abierto, multicéntrico, de grupos paralelos. Se crearon 2 grupos al finalizar un programa de RP intensiva en régimen ambulatorio de 8 semanas de duración. A los pacientes del grupo de intervención (GI) se les proporcionó el equipo de entrenamiento apropiado y se les instruyó para realizar 3 sesiones de entrenamiento semanales y enviar los datos de rendimiento a través de una aplicación a una plataforma web. Se aconsejó a los pacientes del grupo de control (GC) que hicieran ejercicio regularmente (cuidado habitual). Resultados: Se aleatorizaron 94 pacientes (46 GI, 48 GC). El análisis de covarianza mostró mejoras no significativas en la distancia en la prueba de marcha de 6 min (19,9 m [IC 95%: −4,1/+43,8]) y el cuestionario de enfermedad respiratoria crónica-factor emocional (0,4 puntos [0-0,8]) en el GI. Los modelos lineales mixtos secundarios mostraron mejoras en el GI en las puntuaciones de la sección mental del SF-36 (9,7 [4,0-15,4]) y el cuestionario de enfermedad respiratoria crónica-factor emocional (0,5 puntos [0,2-0,9]), pero no se demostró asociación entre el cumplimiento y los resultados. Las exacerbaciones agudas se asociaron con una disminución marginalmente significativa en la distancia en la prueba de la marcha de 6 min de 15,8 m (−32,3/0,8) en los modelos lineales. Conclusiones: La estrategia de mantenimiento TeleRP fue viable y segura, pero no se demostró superioridad frente al cuidado habitual, a pesar de las mejoras en algunos aspectos en las valoraciones de la calidad de vida en relación con la salud. Las exacerbaciones agudas podrían tener una influencia negativa importante en la función física a largo plazo. Identificador ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03247933
    corecore