Article Figures & Data
Tables
- Table 1.
The relation between the expression of CagA, VacA, UreA, UreB and the diagnosis by endoscopy
Group Case CagA positive VacA positive UreA positive UreB positive CSG 31 20(64.5) 24(77.4) 11(35.5) 24(77.4) CAG 14 13(92.9) 13(92.9) 8(57.1) 8(64.3) DU 11 9(81.8) 10(90.9) 8(72.7) 3(27.3) GU 13 12(92.3) 12(92.3) 6(46.2) 4(30.8) GC 71 61(85.9) 57(80.3) 36(50.7) 32(45.1) Compound ulcer 7 7(100) 7(100) 6(85.7) 4(57.1) - Table 2.
The relation between the expression of CagA, VacA, UreA, UreB and pathologic diagnosis (case, percentage)
Group Case CagA positive VacA positive UreA positive UreB positive CSG 20 13(65.0) 16(80.0) 3(15.0) 16(80.0) CAG 21 18(85.8) 20(95.2) 13(61.9) 9(42.8) Intestinal metaplasia 8 6(75.0) 1(12.5) 0(0) 1(25.0) Mild atypical proliferation 30 26(86.7) 23(83.3) 23(83.3) 20(66.7) Moderate or severe atypical proliferation 6 5(83.3) 3(50.0) 3(50.0) 3(50.0) Gastric cancer 62 52(83.9) 50(80.6) 29(46.7) 25(40.3)







