Detection of Occult Upper Gastrointestinal Tract Bleeding: Performance Differences in Fecal Occult Blood Tests
Abstract
Objective To compare rates of detection of occult upper gastrointestinal (GI) tract bleeding by guaiac (Hemoccult II [HO]), immunochemical (HemeSelect [HS]), and heme-porphyrin (HemoQuant [HQT]) fecal occult blood tests. PATIENTS, SUBJECTS, AND METHODS: In a cross-sectional study to detect native occult upper GI tract bleeding, single stools were collected from 56 patients with iron deficiency and a proven hemorrhagic GI tract lesion. In a longitudinal study to detect simulated occult upper GI tract bleeding, 3 stool samples were serially collected from 10 clinically normal subjects after ingestion of 5 and 15 mL of autologous blood. All stool samples were subjected to blinded fecal occult blood determinations with use of the 3 tests. Results In the cross-sectional study, the HQT test detected 88% (37/42) of hemorrhagic upper GI tract lesions compared with 26% (11/42) detected by the HO test (P Conclusion The HQT test detects occult upper GI tract blood loss significantly more frequently than the HO or HS test.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
FIT is human-specific, not affected by dietary artifact, and detects primarily lower intestinal bleeding.
“FIT has been increasingly the FOBT of choice for CRC screening, as it is human-specific, not affected by dietary artifact, and detects primarily lower intestinal bleeding [3, 6, 7].”
From Novel Approach to Fecal Occult Blood Testing by Assay of Erythrocyte-Specific microRNA Markers (2017) · cites this paper as [6]
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Novel Approach to Fecal Occult Blood Testing by Assay of Erythrocyte-Specific microRNA Markers
Wu, C. W., Cao, X., Berger, C. K., Foote, P. H., Mahoney, D. W., Simonson, J. A., Anderson, B. W., Yab, T. C., Taylor, W. R., Boardman, L. A., et al. (2017) · Digestive Diseases and Sciences · doi:10.1007/s10620-017-4627-6 · Cited by 37 · see citing works
Self-citation
- Authors
- Harewood, G. C., McConnell, J. P., Harrington, J. J., Mahoney, D. W., & Ahlquist, D. A.
- Venue
- Mayo Clinic Proceedings
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2002-01
- Volume
- 77
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 23-28
- ISSN
- 0025-6196
- Cited by
- 19
- References
- 0
- Language
- en
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
