The authors compare efficacy of two ELISA assays (one supplied by DIAMEDIX [Delta Biological s.r.l.], and the other by RADIM [RADIM I]) in detecting total anti-H. pylori antibodies, and of two further ELISA methods (one supplied by EUROSPITAL [Helori CTX IgG] and the other by RADIM [RADIM 2]) in identifying anti-CagA antibodies, using sera from 69 controls (20 adults and 49 children) and from 96 patients, obtained before endoscopy. Seventy-three of the patients had H. pylori infection, while the remaining 23 were H. pylori negative (histology and polymerase chain reaction [PCR]). Fifty-two of the H. pylori positive patients, had cagA-positive strain infection, identified by PCR. The DIAMEDIX assay was found to be more sensitive (92%) than RADIM 1 (79%) in identifying H. pylori positive patients, irrespective of the infecting strain. On the other hand, the DIAMEDIX assay was less specific than RADIM 1 for H. pylori-negative patients (43% vs. 83%). However, when patients already treated for H. pylori infection were excluded from the group of H. pylori-negative patients, the DIAMEDIX assay had a specificity of 89%. In identifying anti-CagA antibodies, the kit supplied by RADIM (RADIM 2) had a sensitivity of 90% and a specificity of 94%, whereas that supplied by EUROSPITAL had a sensitivity of 100% and a specificity of 76%. The performances of the two methods in the identification of anti-CagA antibodies were found to be similar. The authors conclude that, in view of its high sensitivity, the DIAMEDIX assay may be useful in screening for H. pylori infection.