Hepatitis C virus (HCV) is a global health care problem. Diagnosis of HCV infection is mainly based on the detection of anti-HCV antibodies as a screening test with serum samples. Recombinant immunoblot assays are used as supplemental tests and for the final detection and quantification of HCV RNA in confirmatory tests. In this study, we aimed to compare the HCV core antigen test with the HCV RNA assay for confirming anti-HCV results to determine whether the HCV core antigen test may be used as an alternative confirmatory test to the HCV RNA test and to assess the diagnostic values of the total HCV core antigen test by determining the diagnostic specificity and sensitivity rates compared with the HCV RNA test. Sera from a total of 212 treatment-naive patients were analyzed for anti-HCV and HCV core antigen both with the Abbott Architect test and with the molecular HCV RNA assay consisting of a reverse transcription-PCR method as a confirmatory test. The diagnostic sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values of the HCV core antigen assay compared to the HCV RNA test were 96.3%, 100%, 100%, and 89.7%, respectively. The levels of HCV core antigen showed a good correlation with those from the HCV RNA quantification (r ‫؍‬ 0.907). In conclusion, the Architect HCV antigen assay is highly specific, sensitive, reliable, easy to perform, reproducible, cost-effective, and applicable as a screening, supplemental, and preconfirmatory test for anti-HCV assays used in laboratory procedures for the diagnosis of hepatitis C virus infection.

Background Several noninvasive diagnostic tests based on the detection of Helicobacter pylori stool antigen (HpSA) have been developed. The aim of the study was to compare the diagnostic accuracy of 5 HpSA tests—2 monoclonal enzyme immunoassay tests (EIAs: the Premier Platinum HpSA Plus test and Helicobacter pylori Antigen (Hp Ag) test) and 3 rapid immunochromatographic assay (ICA) tests (the ImmunoCard STAT! HpSA test, one step HpSA test, and H. pylori fecal antigen test)—for diagnosing H. pylori infection in adult patients with dyspeptic symptoms before eradication therapy. Materials and Methods A total of 198 patients with dyspeptic symptoms were included in the study. A gastric biopsy was collected for histopathology and rapid urease testing. Stool specimens for HpSA testing were also collected. Patients were considered H. pylori positive if two invasive tests (histological and rapid urease tests) were positive. Results The sensitivity and specificity were 92.2% and 94.4%, respectively, for the Premier Platinum HpSA Plus test; 48.9% and 88.9%, respectively, for the HP Ag test; 86.7% and 88.9, respectively, for the One Step HpSA test; 68.9% and 92.6%, respectively, for the ImmunoCard STAT! HpSA test; and 78.9% and 87%, respectively, for the H. Pylori fecal antigen test. Conclusions The Premier Platinum HpSA Plus EIA test was determined to be the most accurate stool test for diagnosing H. pylori infections in adult dyspeptic patients. The currently available ICA‐based tests are fast and easy to use but provide less reliable results.

Background. Chronic inflammation may play a role in psoriasis pathogenesis. Lipocalin 2, clusterin, soluble tumor necrosis factor receptor-1 (sTNFR-1), interleukin-6, homocysteine, and uric acid are inflammatory and/or biochemical markers. However, both the roles of these markers and the pathogenesis of psoriasis are unknown. Objective. The aim of this study was to investigate serum levels of lipocalin 2, clusterin, sTNFR-1, interleukin-6, homocysteine, and uric acid in patients and controls groups. Methods. Fifty-six patients with psoriasis and 33 healthy controls were included in the study. Serum concentrations of the markers were evaluated by ELISA. The Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) was evaluated in all psoriasis patients. Body mass index (BMI) was calculated by dividing weight (kg) by height (m) squared. Results. The serum value of lipocalin and sTNFR-1 were significantly higher in psoriasis patients than in controls (resp., P < 0.001, P < 0.05). The others showed no significant differences between psoriasis and the control groups (all of them P > 0.05). The mean PASI score in the patient group was 8.3 ± 6.5. Conclusions. These findings suggest that lipocalin 2 and sTNFR-1 might play a role in the pathogenesis of psoriasis and can be used as markers of the disease.

Objective: The aims of this study were to evaluate serum levels of acute phase reactants, such as CRP and cytokines (TNF-α and IL-6) in patients who have undergone thoracotomy and to investigate the effects of flurbiprofen on postoperative inflammatory response.Methods: Forty patients undergoing posterolateral thoracotomy were randomly divided into 2 groups of 20 each. Control group received tramadol (4 x 100 mg) intravenously for four days, and flurbiprofen group received both tramadol (4 x 100 mg) and flurbiprofen (2 x 100 mg). Blood samples were collected before surgery and at the 3th and 168th hours after surgical procedure to measure serum CRP, IL-6, and TNF-α. Pain visual analog scales were recorded daily during the first four postoperative days. Spirometric measurement of forced expiratory volume in the first second (FEV 1) was done before and four days after the operation.Results: The serum CRP, IL-6, and TNF-α levels in both groups increased significantly at 3th hour after thoracotomy. Serum TNF-α levels did not differ significantly between the groups at postoperative 4th day. However, IL-6 and CRP were significantly lower in flurbiprofen group than in control group at the same day (p<0.05). Visual analog scale was significantly lower in flurbiprofen group at 6th, 12th, 48th, 72th, and 96th hours postoperatively (p<0.05). The patients receiving flurbiprofen had higher FEV 1 values when compared with control group at postoperative 4th day.Conclusions: Patients undergoing thoracotomy showed reduced postoperative pain, mean additional analgesic consumption, and serum IL-6 and CRP levels, when flurbiprofen was added to systemic analgesic therapy. Analgesia with anti-inflammatory drug may contribute to the attenuation of the postoperative inflammatory response and prevent postoperative pain in patients undergoing thoracotomy.

Background: Clostridium difficile is a common cause of hospital-acquired diarrhea, which is usually associated with previous antibiotic use. The clinical manifestations of C. difficile infection (CDI) may range from mild diarrhea to fulminant colitis. Clostridium difficile should be considered in diarrhea cases with a history of antibiotic use within the last 8 weeks (community-associated CDI) or with a hospital stay of at least 3 days, regardless of the duration of antibiotic use (hospital-acquired CDI). Aims: This study investigated the frequency of CDI in diarrheic patients and evaluated the efficacy of the triple diagnostic algorithm that is proposed here for C. difficile detection. Study Design: Cross-sectional study. Methods: In this study, we compared three methods currently employed for C. difficile detection using 95 patient stool samples: an enzyme immunoassay (EIA) for toxin A/B (C. diff Toxin A+B; Diagnostic Automation Inc.; Calabasas, CA, USA), an EIA for glutamate dehydrogenase (GDH) (C. DIFF CHEK-60TM, TechLab Inc.; Blacksburg, VA, USA), and a polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-based assay (GeneXpert ® C. difficile; Cepheid, Sunnyvale, CA, USA) that detects C. difficile toxin genes and conventional methods as well. In this study, 50.5% of the patients were male, 50 patients were outpatients, 32 were from inpatient clinics and 13 patients were from the intensive care unit. Results:Of the 95 stool samples tested for GDH, 28 were positive. Six samples were positive by PCR, while nine samples were positive for toxin A/B. The hypervirulent strain NAP-1 and binary toxin was not detected. The rate of occurrence of toxigenic C. difficile was 5.1% in the samples. Cefaclor, ampicillin-sulbactam, ertapenem, and piperacillin-tazobactam were the most commonly used antibiotics by patients preceding the onset of diarrhea. Among the patients who were hospitalized in an intensive care unit for more than 7 days, 83.3% were positive for CDI by PCR screening. If the PCR test is accepted as the reference: C. difficile Toxin A/B ELISA sensitivity and specificity were 67% and 94%, respectively, and GDH sensitivity and specificity were 100% and 75%, respectively. Conclusion: Tests targeting C. difficile toxins are frequently applied for the purpose of diagnosing CDI in a clinical setting. However, changes in the temperature and reductant composition of the feces may affect toxin stability, potentially yielding false-negative test results. Therefore, employment of a GDH EIA, which has high sensitivity, as a screening test for the detection of toxigenic strains, may prevent false-negative results, and its adoption as part of a multistep diagnostic algorithm may increase accuracy in the diagnosis of CDIs.