Validity of a Portable Breath Analyser (AIRE) for the Assessment of Lactose Malabsorption

Glucose breath test for the detection of small intestine bacterial overgrowth: Impact of diet prior to the test

BACKGROUND

Glucose breath test (GBT) is used for the diagnosis of small intestine bacterial overgrowth. A restrictive diet without fibers and/or fermentable food is recommended on the day before the test. The aim of our retrospective study was to evaluate the impact of two different restrictive diets on the results of GBT.

METHODS

A change of the pretest restrictive diet was applied in our lab on September 1, 2020. The recommended diet was a fiber-free diet before this date, and a fiber-free diet plus restriction of all fermentable food afterward. We thus compared the results of GBT performed before (group A) and after (group B) this pretest diet modification. Demographics, reasons to perform GBT, digestive symptoms, and hydrogen and methane baseline values and variations after glucose ingestion were compared between the two groups.

KEY RESULTS

269 patients underwent GBT in group A, and 316 patients in group B. The two groups were comparable in terms of demographics. Methane and hydrogen baseline values were significantly higher in group A (respectively 14 [18] vs. 8 [14] ppm, p < 0.01 and 11 [14] vs. 6 [8] ppm, p < 0.01). The percentage of positive tests was higher in group A for methane (43% vs. 28%, p < 0.05), and for hydrogen (18% vs. 12%, p = 0.03).

CONCLUSION & INFERENCES

This retrospective study suggests the importance of the restrictive diet prior to GBT. A strict limitation of fibers and fermentable food decreased hydrogen and methane baseline values, and the prevalence of positive GBT. Thus a strict restrictive diet should be recommended on the day before the test, in order to limit the impact of food on hydrogen and methane breath levels, and possibly improve the diagnosis quality of GBT.

Breath Tests Used in the Context of Bariatric Surgery

This review article focuses on the use of breath tests in the field of bariatrics and obesitology. The first part of the review is an introduction to breath test problematics with a focus on their use in bariatrics. The second part provides a brief history of breath testing. Part three describes how breath tests are used for monitoring certain processes in various organs and various substances in exhaled air and how the results are analyzed and evaluated. The last part covers studies that described the use of breath tests for monitoring patients that underwent bariatric treatments. Although the number of relevant studies is small, this review could promote the future use of breath testing in the context of bariatric treatments.

Breathing new life into clinical testing and diagnostics: perspectives on volatile biomarkers from breath

Human breath offers several benefits for diagnostic applications, including simple, noninvasive collection. Breath is a rich source of clinically-relevant biological information; this includes a volatile fraction, where greater than 1,000 volatile organic compounds (VOCs) have been described so far, and breath aerosols that carry nucleic acids, proteins, signaling molecules, and pathogens. Many of these factors, especially VOCs, are delivered to the lung by the systemic circulation, and diffusion of candidate biomarkers from blood into breath allows systematic profiling of organismal health. Biomarkers on breath offer the capability to advance early detection and precision medicine in areas of global clinical need. Breath tests are noninvasive and can be performed at home or in a primary care setting, which makes them well-suited for the kind of public screening program that could dramatically improve the early detection of conditions such as lung cancer. Since measurements of VOCs on breath largely report on metabolic changes, this too aids in the early detection of a broader range of illnesses and can be used to detect metabolic shifts that could be targeted through precision medicine. Furthermore, the ability to perform frequent sampling has envisioned applications in monitoring treatment responses. Breath has been investigated in respiratory, liver, gut, and neurological diseases and in contexts as diverse as infectious diseases and cancer. Preclinical research studies using breath have been ongoing for some time, yet only a few breath-based diagnostics tests are currently available and in widespread clinical use. Most recently, tests assessing the gut microbiome using hydrogen and methane on breath, in addition to tests using urea to detect Helicobacter pylori infections have been released, yet there are many more applications of breath tests still to be realized. Here, we discuss the strengths of breath as a clinical sampling matrix and the technical challenges to be addressed in developing it for clinical use. Historically, a lack of standardized methodologies has delayed the discovery and validation of biomarker candidates, resulting in a proliferation of early-stage pilot studies. We will explore how advancements in breath collection and analysis are in the process of driving renewed progress in the field, particularly in the context of gastrointestinal and chronic liver disease. Finally, we will provide a forward-looking outlook for developing the next generation of clinically relevant breath tests and how they may emerge into clinical practice.

Digital Resilience Biomarkers for Personalized Health Maintenance and Disease Prevention

Health maintenance and disease prevention strategies become increasingly prioritized with increasing health and economic burden of chronic, lifestyle-related diseases. A key element in these strategies is the empowerment of individuals to control their health. Self-measurement plays an essential role in achieving such empowerment. Digital measurements have the advantage of being measured non-invasively, passively, continuously, and in a real-world context. An important question is whether such measurement can sensitively measure subtle disbalances in the progression toward disease, as well as the subtle effects of, for example, nutritional improvement. The concept of resilience biomarkers, defined as the dynamic evaluation of the biological response to an external challenge, has been identified as a viable strategy to measure these subtle effects. In this review, we explore the potential of integrating this concept with digital physiological measurements to come to digital resilience biomarkers. Additionally, we discuss the potential of wearable, non-invasive, and continuous measurement of molecular biomarkers. These types of innovative measurements may, in the future, also serve as a digital resilience biomarker to provide even more insight into the personal biological dynamics of an individual. Altogether, digital resilience biomarkers are envisioned to allow for the measurement of subtle effects of health maintenance and disease prevention strategies in a real-world context and thereby give personalized feedback to improve health.

Evaluation of a Digital Handheld Hydrogen Breath Monitor to Diagnose Lactose Malabsorption: Interventional Crossover Study

Background

Lactose malabsorption is a common condition that affects a broad segment of the population. Clinical diagnosis based on symptom recall can be unreliable and conventional testing can be inconvenient, requiring expensive laboratory-based equipment and conduction of the testing in a clinical setting.

Objective

The aim of this study is to assess the performance of a digital handheld hydrogen breath monitor (GIMate) in diagnosing lactose malabsorption compared to a US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)–cleared device (H2 Check) for the same indication.

Methods

An interventional crossover study was performed in adult participants with a prior confirmed diagnosis of lactose malabsorption or a suspected history of lactose intolerance.

Results

A total of 31 participants (mean age 33.9 years) were enrolled in the study. There was 100% positive percent agreement and 100% negative percent agreement between the GIMate monitor and the H2 Check. Correlation between gastrointestinal symptoms and hydrogen values was positive at 0.82 (P<.001).

Conclusions

The digital handheld GIMate breath monitor achieved equivalent diagnostic performance to that of an FDA-cleared device in the diagnosis of lactose malabsorption.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04754724; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04754724

European guideline on indications, performance, and clinical impact of hydrogen and methane breath tests in adult and pediatric patients: European Association for Gastroenterology, Endoscopy and Nutrition, European Society of Neurogastroenterology and Motility, and European Society for Paediatric Gastroenterology Hepatology and Nutrition consensus

Introduction

Measurement of breath hydrogen (H₂) and methane (CH₄) excretion after ingestion of test‐carbohydrates is used for different diagnostic purposes. There is a lack of standardization among centers performing these tests and this, together with recent technical developments and evidence from clinical studies, highlight the need for a European guideline.

Methods

This consensus‐based clinical practice guideline defines the clinical indications, performance, and interpretation of H₂‐CH₄‐breath tests in adult and pediatric patients. A balance between scientific evidence and clinical experience was achieved by a Delphi consensus that involved 44 experts from 18 European countries. Eighty eight statements and recommendations were drafted based on a review of the literature. Consensus (≥80% agreement) was reached for 82. Quality of evidence was evaluated using validated criteria.

Results

The guideline incorporates new insights into the role of symptom assessment to diagnose carbohydrate (e.g., lactose) intolerances and recommends that breath tests for carbohydrate malabsorption require additional validated concurrent symptom evaluation to establish carbohydrate intolerance. Regarding the use of breath tests for the evaluation of oro‐cecal transit time and suspected small bowel bacterial overgrowth, this guideline highlights confounding factors associated with the interpretation of H₂‐CH₄‐breath tests in these indications and recommends approaches to mitigate these issues.

Conclusion

This clinical practice guideline should facilitate pan‐European harmonization of diagnostic approaches to symptoms and disorders, which are very common in specialist and primary care gastroenterology practice, both in adult and pediatric patients. In addition, it identifies areas of future research needs to clarify diagnostic and therapeutic approaches.

Evaluation of breath, plasma, and urinary markers of lactose malabsorption to diagnose lactase non-persistence following lactose or milk ingestion

Background

Adult lactase non-persistence (LNP) is due to low lactase expression, resulting in lactose malabsorption (LM). LNP is a genetic trait, but is typically determined by LM markers including breath H₂, blood glucose, and urinary galactose after a lactose tolerance test. Known validity of these markers using milk is limited, despite being common practice. Compositional variation, such as β-casein variants, in milk may impact diagnostic efficacy. This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy to detect LNP using these commonly measured LM markers after both lactose and milk challenges.

Methods

Fourty healthy young women were challenged with 50 g lactose then randomized for separate cross-over visits to ingest 750 mL milk (37.5 g lactose) as conventional (both A1 and A2 β-casein) and A1 β-casein-free (a2 Milk™) milk. Blood, breath and urine were collected prior to and up to 3 h following each challenge. The presence of C/T₁₃₉₁₀ and G/A₂₂₀₁₈ polymorphisms, determined by restriction fragment length polymorphism, was used as the diagnostic reference for LNP.

Results

Genetic testing identified 14 out of 40 subjects as having LNP (C/C₁₃₉₁₀ and G/G₂₂₀₁₈). All three LM markers (breath H₂, plasma glucose and urinary galactose/creatinine) discriminated between lactase persistence (LP) and LNP following lactose challenge with an area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC) of 1.00, 0.75 and 0.73, respectively. Plasma glucose and urinary galactose/creatinine were unreliable (AUC < 0.70) after milk ingestion. The specificity of breath H₂ remained high (100%) when milk was used, but sensitivity was reduced with conventional (92.9%) and a2 Milk™ (78.6%) compared to lactose (sensitivities adjusted for lactose content). The breath H₂ optimal cut-off value was lower with a2 Milk™ (13 ppm) than conventional milk (21 ppm). Using existing literature cut-off values the sensitivity and specificity of breath H₂ was greater than plasma glucose to detect LNP following lactose challenge whereas values obtained for urinary galactose/creatinine were lower than the existing literature cut-offs.

Conclusion

This study showed accurate diagnosis of LNP by breath H₂ irrespective of the substrate used, although the diagnostic threshold may vary depending on the lactose substrate or the composition of the milk.

Trial registration

ACTRN12616001694404. Registered prospectively on December 9, 2016.