Peron Gregorio, Dall'Acqua Stefano, Sorrenti Vincenzo, Carrara Maria, Fortinguerra Stefano, Zorzi Giulia, Buriani Alessandro
Department of Pharmaceutical and Pharmacological Sciences, University of Padova, Padova, Italy.
Unir&d, Nutraceutical Laboratory, Padova, Italy.
Clin Exp Gastroenterol. 2018 Jun 18;11:243-248. doi: 10.2147/CEG.S163962. eCollection 2018.
Lactose malabsorption is normally evaluated by measuring exhaled H produced by intestinal flora, from unabsorbed lactose. However, differing microbiome composition can lead to the production of CH instead of H; hence, some authors challenge the H method sensitivity and favor the evaluation of both intestinal gases.
To compare different approaches to usage of a lactose breath test for lactose malabsorption diagnosis, after medical evaluation of gastrointestinal symptoms.
In a retrospective observational study, we compared the 2 approaches in a population of 282 subjects in Northern Italy. Following oral lactose administration, exhaled samples were harvested every 30 minutes for 4 hours and prepared for H and CH analysis. Basal gas levels were subtracted from H and CH ppm and values at 4 hours and peaks were considered for analysis.
Applying the standard methodology, which takes separately into consideration H and CH produced in the intestinal lumen, the results indicated that 11.7% of the patients were diagnosed "positive" for hypolactasia, differently from what was expected. Conversely, taking into consideration the sum of H and CH, the percentage increased to 62.8%, closer to the expected one. No significant differences were found when comparing the 2 groups for age, gender, or symptoms. The sizable difference between the 2 approaches is likely linked to gut microbiome variability, and consequently the different production of the 2 gases, in the population.
The threshold normally used for lactose breath test should be reconsidered and changed, merging H and CH stoichiometric values to increase sensitivity.
乳糖吸收不良通常通过测量肠道菌群由未吸收乳糖产生的呼出氢气来评估。然而,不同的微生物群组成可能导致产生甲烷而非氢气;因此,一些作者质疑氢气检测方法的敏感性,并主张同时评估两种肠道气体。
在对胃肠道症状进行医学评估后,比较乳糖呼气试验用于乳糖吸收不良诊断的不同方法。
在一项回顾性观察研究中,我们在意大利北部的282名受试者中比较了两种方法。口服乳糖后,每30分钟采集呼出样本,持续4小时,并准备进行氢气和甲烷分析。从氢气和甲烷的百万分比中减去基础气体水平,并考虑4小时时的值和峰值进行分析。
应用分别考虑肠腔内产生的氢气和甲烷的标准方法,结果表明,与预期不同,11.7%的患者被诊断为乳糖不耐受“阳性”。相反,考虑氢气和甲烷的总和时,该百分比增加到62.8%,更接近预期值。在比较两组的年龄、性别或症状时未发现显著差异。两种方法之间的显著差异可能与人群中肠道微生物群的变异性有关,因此与两种气体的不同产生有关。
应重新考虑并改变乳糖呼气试验通常使用的阈值,合并氢气和甲烷的化学计量值以提高敏感性。