Salivary gland scintigraphy in Sjögren's syndrome and patients with sicca symptoms but without Sjögren's syndrome: the psychological profiles and predictors for salivary gland dysfunction.

OBJECTIVE: To characterise the psychological profiles of Sjögren's syndrome (SS) and patients with sicca symptoms but without SS; to find predictors for salivary gland function; to evaluate salivary scintigraphy as a method to differentiate between SS and patients with sicca symptoms but without SS. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Psychological tests (Medical Outcomes Study Short Form General Health Survey (SF-36), Jenkins Activity Survey, Toronto Alexithymia Scale, and Maastricht Questionnaire for vital exhaustion) were performed and assessment of the function of the salivary glands made in 26 patients with primary SS, 8 with secondary SS, and 9 with sicca symptoms but without SS. Data were analysed with BMDP new system version 1.0 statistical program. RESULTS: Psychological profiles were similar in all groups. Hb, RF, ANA, and SSA differentiated between the groups. Results of salivary scintigraphy were predicted to 51% by ANA, SSA, SSB, IgG, IgA, diagnosis, vitality, and role limitations due to emotional problems. No predictors were found for the resting salivary flow. Salivary scintigraphy was pathological in 21/26 (81%) and in 8/8 (100%) patients with secondary SS, but only in 2/9 (22%) patients with sicca symptoms without SS (p=0.002) (sensitivity 85.3%, specificity 77.8%). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with sicca symptoms but without SS have sickness behaviour similar to that of patients with SS. The results of salivary scintigraphy can be predicted by diagnosis and autoimmune findings; psychological characteristics added 20% to this predictive value. Distinction between SS and patients with sicca symptoms but without SS is difficult, but in addition to autoantibodies, salivary scintigraphy can be used for this purpose.

Evaluation of Pyloriset Screen, a rapid whole-blood diagnostic test for Helicobacter pylori infection.

Helicobacter pylori infection can be detected by several invasive tests based on gastroscopy and by noninvasive methods such as serologic assays. Noninvasive tests can be used not only in addition to invasive tests but also by themselves to screen for H. pylori infection in patients who are not in urgent need of endoscopy. Lately, rapid qualitative serologic tests have been developed. In the present study, the accuracy of a novel rapid whole-blood test, Pyloriset Screen, detecting immunoglobulin G (IgG) and IgA antibodies against H. pylori was evaluated. A total of 207 consecutive adult outpatients referred for upper endoscopy were enrolled. Gastric biopsy specimens were taken from the antrum and corpus for histologic examination and rapid urease testing. Cultures were available for 113 patients. Serum samples collected from all patients were tested for H. pylori antibodies by two enzyme immunoassays (EIAs) (Pyloriset EIA and an in-house EIA), a rapid latex agglutination test (Pyloriset Dry), and Pyloriset Screen. Patients were considered H. pylori positive if helicobacters were seen on histologic examination (77 patients) or, if in combination with histologically verified (although helicobacter-negative) gastritis, their IgG antibody titers were elevated in the two EIAs (five patients). The Pyloriset Screen test had a sensitivity of 95%, a specificity of 94%, a positive predictive value of 91%, and a negative predictive value of 97%. Among 63 patients under the age of 45 years, the Pyloriset Screen test did not miss a single H. pylori diagnosis, and only 1 patient had a false-positive result. Pyloriset Screen could be used reliably to screen for H. pylori infection.

Urine trypsinogen-2 as marker of acute pancreatitis.

We examined the clinical utility of urine trypsinogen-2 as a marker of acute pancreatitis (AP). Fifty-nine patients with AP, 42 with acute abdominal diseases of extrapancreatic origin, and 63 without evidence of acute abdominal disease were studied. Urine trypsinogen-2 was determined by a time-resolved immunofluorometric assay. As reference methods we used serum trypsinogen-2, urine amylase, and serum amylase. The diagnostic accuracy of the markers was evaluated by receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) analysis. At admission, urine trypsinogen-2 differentiated patients with AP from controls with high accuracy. The area under the ROC curve (AUC) was 0.978, which was equal to that of serum trypsinogen-2 (0.998) and serum amylase (0.969) and significantly larger than that of urine amylase. For differentiation between severe and mild AP, urine trypsinogen-2 (0.730) was equal to serum trypsinogen-2 (0.721), and clearly better than amylase in serum and urine. These results suggest that determination of urine trypsinogen-2 is a useful test to detect AP and to evaluate disease severity.