4.5 Article Proceedings Paper

Discriminating IBD from IBS: Comparison of the test performance of fecal markers, blood leukocytes, CRP, and IBD antibodies

Journal

INFLAMMATORY BOWEL DISEASES
Volume 14, Issue 1, Pages 32-39

Publisher

JOHN WILEY & SONS INC
DOI: 10.1002/ibd.20275

Keywords

discriminating IBD from IBS; PhiCal test; IBD-SCAN; biomarkers; calprotectin; lactoferrin

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Symptoms of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) and irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) can overlap. We aimed to determine the accuracy of fecal markers, C-reactive protein (CRP), blood leukocytes, and antibody panels for discriminating IBD from IBS and to define a '' best test.'' Methods: We prospectively included 64 patients with IBD (36 Crohn's disease [CD], 28 ulcerative colitis [UC]), 30 with IBS, and 42 healthy controls. Besides CRP and blood leukocytes, blinded fecal samples were measured for calprotectin (PhiCal Test, enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay [ELISA]), lactoferrin (IBD-SCAN, ELISA), Hexagon-OBTI (immunochromatographic test for detection of human hemoglobin), and LELTKO-TEST (lactoferrin latex-agglutination test). Blinded serum samples were measured for the antibodies ASCA (ELISA) and pANCA (immunofluorescence). Results: Overall accuracy of tests for discriminating IBD from IBS: IBD-SCAN 90%, PhiCal Test 89%, LEUKO-TEST 78%, Hexagon-OBTI 74%, CRP 73%, blood leukocytes 63%, CD antibodies (ASCA+/pANCA- or ASCA+/pANCA+) 55%, UC antibodies (pANCA+/ASCA-) 49%. ASCA and pANCA had an accuracy of 78% for detecting CD and 75% for detecting UC, respectively. The overall accuracy of IBD-SCAN and PhiCal Test combined with ASCA/pANCA for discriminating IBD from IBS was 92% and 91%, respectively. Conclusions: The PhiCal Test and IBD-SCAN are highly accurate for discriminating IBD from IBS. There is only marginal additional diagnostic accuracy when the PhiCal Test and IBD-SCAN are combined with ASCA and pANCA. ASCA and pANCA have a high specificity for IBD.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available