A254 PREVALENCE OF <i>HELICOBACTER PYLORI</i> INFECTION IN BARIATRIC SURGERY PATIENTS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Helicobacter Pylori (HP) infection is the most common chronic infection in humans. Known risk factors include poor socioeconomic status and living conditions, especially at a young age. In Canada, the prevalence is estimated between 23% and 38%. The relationship between BMI and HP infection is controversial. Some data suggests that HP infection occurs less frequently in individuals who are overweight. Other authors endorse that obesity is a risk factor for HP infection, possibly explained by altered innate and adaptive immunity in these patients. Aims The objectives were to determine the prevalence of HP infection in patients undergoing bariatric surgery and assess the correlation between HP infection and various patient characteristics. Methods All patients who underwent bariatric surgery with a gastric resection in a single hospital between 01/2004 and 01/2019 were analyzed. When gastritis was present, HP immunohistochemical testing was performed. Characteristics of HP-positive (HP+) and HP-negative (HP-) patients were compared using Student’s t-test and χ 2 test. Results A total of 6388 specimens were reviewed (4365 women & 2023 men) with a mean age of 44.9±11.2 years and a mean BMI of 49.3±8.2 kg/m2. Histology-proven HP infection rate was 6.3% (n=405). There was no significant difference in sex, BMI and body weight between HP+ and HP- patients. HP+ patients were significantly older than HP– patients (47.4±9.8 vs 44.7±11.3 years, respectively, p<0.0001). Logistic regressions identified age as a risk factor for HP infection in this population (OR 1.26, p<0.0001, CI95% 1.14–1.40 for every 10-year increase). Conclusions The rate of histology-proven HP infection is low in patients with severe obesity who present for bariatric surgery and is directly associated with age. The benefits of routine preoperative testing in non-gastric-bypass surgery candidates should be questioned. Characteristics of study participants Funding Agencies This study was performed with support from the Research Chair in Bariatric and Metabolic Surgery at Laval University (L. Biertho and A. Tchernof). MC is the recipient of a studentship from Diabète Québec.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".