The DOI matches its Crossref record.
The 13 C urea breath test in the diagnosis of Helicobacter pylori infection
Open accessAbstract
The urea breath test (UBT) is one of the most important non-invasive methods for detecting Helicobacter pylori infection. The test exploits the hydrolysis of orally administered urea by the enzyme urease, which H pylori produces in large quantities. Urea is hydrolysed to ammonia and carbon dioxide, which diffuses into the blood and is excreted by the lungs. Isotopically labelled CO2 can be detected in breath using various methods. Labelling urea with 13C is becoming increasingly popular because this non-radioactive isotope is innocuous and can be safely used in children and women of childbearing age. Breath samples can also be sent by post or courier to remote analysis centres. The test is easy to perform and can be repeated as often as required in the same patient. A meal must be given to increase the contact time between the tracer and the H pylori urease inside the stomach. The test has been simplified to the point that two breath samples collected before and 30 minutes after the ingestion of urea in a liquid form suffice to provide reliable diagnostic information. The cost of producing 13C-urea is high, but it may be possible to reduce the dosage further by administering it in capsule form. An isotope ratio mass spectrometer (IRMS) is generally used to measure 13C enrichment in breath samples, but this machine is expensive. In order to reduce this cost, new and cheaper equipment based on non-dispersive, isotope selective, infrared spectroscopy (NDIRS) and laser assisted ratio analysis (LARA) have recently been developed. These are valid alternatives to IRMS although they cannot process the same large number of breath samples simultaneously. These promising advances will certainly promote the wider use of the 13C-UBT, which is especially useful for epidemiological studies in children and adults, for screening patients before endoscopy, and for assessing the efficacy of eradication regimens.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Quality Indicators for Colonoscopy
Rex, D. K., Petrini, J. L., Baron, T. H., Chak, A., Cohen, J., Deal, S. E., Hoffman, B., Jacobson, B. C., Mergener, K., Petersen, B. T., et al. (2006) · The American Journal of Gastroenterology · doi:10.1111/j.1572-0241.2006.00673.x · Cited by 845
Gisbert, J. P., & Pajares, J. M. (2004) · Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2036.2004.02203.x · Cited by 374
Romagnuolo, J., Schiller, D., & Bailey, R. J. (2002) · The American Journal of Gastroenterology · doi:10.1111/j.1572-0241.2002.05664.x · Cited by 283
Seddik, H., Boutallaka, H., Elkoti, I., Nejjari, F., Berraida, R., Berrag, S., Loubaris, K., Sentissi, S., & Benkirane, A. (2019) · European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology · doi:10.1007/s00228-019-02625-0 · Cited by 41
Metadata
- Authors
- Savarino, V, Vigneri, S., & Celle, G.
- Venue
- Gut
- Publisher
- BMJ
- Published
- 1999-07-01
- Volume
- 45
- Issue
- suppl 1
- Pages
- I18-I22
- ISSN
- 0017-5749 (ISSN-L)
- 1468-3288
- OpenAlex
- W2135492165
- Cited by
- 186
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 9.73
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The 13 C urea breath test in the diagnosis of Helicobacter pylori infection. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/gut.45.2008.i18
- The paper
- Savarino, V, Vigneri, S., & Celle, G. (1999). The 13 C urea breath test in the diagnosis of Helicobacter pylori infection. Gut. https://doi.org/10.1136/gut.45.2008.i18
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.