-
Je něco špatně v tomto záznamu ?
Evaluation of Giardia intestinalis, Entamoeba histolytica and Cryptosporidium hominis/Cryptosporidium parvum in human stool samples by the BD MAXTM Enteric Parasite Panel
S. Akgun, T. Celik,
Jazyk angličtina Země Česko
Typ dokumentu časopisecké články
NLK
Free Medical Journals
od 1966
ProQuest Central
od 2004-01-01 do Před 3 měsíci
Health & Medicine (ProQuest)
od 2004-01-01 do Před 3 měsíci
Public Health Database (ProQuest)
od 2004-01-01 do Před 3 měsíci
ROAD: Directory of Open Access Scholarly Resources
od 1982
- MeSH
- Cryptosporidium parvum izolace a purifikace MeSH
- Cryptosporidium izolace a purifikace MeSH
- dospělí MeSH
- entamébóza epidemiologie parazitologie MeSH
- Entamoeba histolytica izolace a purifikace MeSH
- feces parazitologie MeSH
- Giardia lamblia izolace a purifikace MeSH
- giardiáza epidemiologie parazitologie MeSH
- kryptosporidióza epidemiologie parazitologie MeSH
- lidé středního věku MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- prevalence MeSH
- Check Tag
- dospělí MeSH
- lidé středního věku MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- mužské pohlaví MeSH
- ženské pohlaví MeSH
- Publikační typ
- časopisecké články MeSH
- Geografické názvy
- Turecko MeSH
Although the microscopic examination of stool samples remains the reference method of choice for the diagnosis of intestinal protistan infections, this method is time-consuming and requires experienced and well-trained operators. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the level of agreement between the BD MAX TM Enteric Parasite Panel (EPP) and microscopy for the detection of Giardia intestinalis (Lambl, 1859), Cryptosporidium spp. and Entamoeba histolytica Schaudinn, 1903 in stool samples. The study included faecal samples of 362 patients who were admitted to our hospital due to gastrointestinal complaints. In the microscopic examination, which was made with the native-lugol method on the stool samples that were taken from the patients, cysts, trophozoites and eggs of the parasite were examined. The diagnosis of G. intestinalis, Cryptosporidium parvum Tyzzer, 1912 and Cryptosporidium hominis Morgan-Ryan, Fall, Ward, Hijjawi, Sulaiman, Fayer, Thompson, Olson, Lal et Xiao, 2002, and E. histolytica was made in the faecal samples using the EPP assay. In the microscopic examination, Cryptosporidium spp. positive stool samples were stained with kinyoun's acid-fast. In the microscopic examination, parasites were detected in 41 (11%) of the 362 stool samples. In contrast, EPP assay identified parasites in 23 (6.3%) of the samples. In the microscopic examination, E. histolytica and Entamoeba dispar Brumpt, 1925 were detected in 22 (6.1%) of the samples, G. intestinalis was seen in 15 (4.1%), and C. parvum or C. hominis were detected in three (0.8%); these values were five (1.4%), 16 (4.4%) and two (0.5%) positive with the EPP assay. Although C. parvum or C. hominis were detected as positive in the microscopic examination of three samples, only two of the samples were positive in both EPP assay and kinyoun's acid-fast method. The EPP assay is a relatively simple test that can distinguish E. histolytica and E. dispar, but it cannot replace microscopy in the diagnosis of amoebiasis. Diagnosis for G. intestinalis and C. parvum/C. hominis with the BD MAXTM enteric parasite panel was equivalent to that with microscopy. We believe that E. histolytica must be diagnosed with nucleic acid amplification tests that have a high sensitivity and specificity like EPP assay in certain patient groups.
Citace poskytuje Crossref.org
- 000
- 00000naa a2200000 a 4500
- 001
- bmc21001263
- 003
- CZ-PrNML
- 005
- 20210119091115.0
- 007
- ta
- 008
- 210119s2020 xr f 000 0|eng||
- 009
- AR
- 024 7_
- $a 10.14411/fp.2020.020 $2 doi
- 035 __
- $a (PubMed)32812530
- 040 __
- $a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
- 041 0_
- $a eng
- 044 __
- $a xr
- 100 1_
- $a Akgun, Sadik $u Adiyaman University, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Microbiology, Adiyaman, Turkey.
- 245 10
- $a Evaluation of Giardia intestinalis, Entamoeba histolytica and Cryptosporidium hominis/Cryptosporidium parvum in human stool samples by the BD MAXTM Enteric Parasite Panel / $c S. Akgun, T. Celik,
- 520 9_
- $a Although the microscopic examination of stool samples remains the reference method of choice for the diagnosis of intestinal protistan infections, this method is time-consuming and requires experienced and well-trained operators. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the level of agreement between the BD MAX TM Enteric Parasite Panel (EPP) and microscopy for the detection of Giardia intestinalis (Lambl, 1859), Cryptosporidium spp. and Entamoeba histolytica Schaudinn, 1903 in stool samples. The study included faecal samples of 362 patients who were admitted to our hospital due to gastrointestinal complaints. In the microscopic examination, which was made with the native-lugol method on the stool samples that were taken from the patients, cysts, trophozoites and eggs of the parasite were examined. The diagnosis of G. intestinalis, Cryptosporidium parvum Tyzzer, 1912 and Cryptosporidium hominis Morgan-Ryan, Fall, Ward, Hijjawi, Sulaiman, Fayer, Thompson, Olson, Lal et Xiao, 2002, and E. histolytica was made in the faecal samples using the EPP assay. In the microscopic examination, Cryptosporidium spp. positive stool samples were stained with kinyoun's acid-fast. In the microscopic examination, parasites were detected in 41 (11%) of the 362 stool samples. In contrast, EPP assay identified parasites in 23 (6.3%) of the samples. In the microscopic examination, E. histolytica and Entamoeba dispar Brumpt, 1925 were detected in 22 (6.1%) of the samples, G. intestinalis was seen in 15 (4.1%), and C. parvum or C. hominis were detected in three (0.8%); these values were five (1.4%), 16 (4.4%) and two (0.5%) positive with the EPP assay. Although C. parvum or C. hominis were detected as positive in the microscopic examination of three samples, only two of the samples were positive in both EPP assay and kinyoun's acid-fast method. The EPP assay is a relatively simple test that can distinguish E. histolytica and E. dispar, but it cannot replace microscopy in the diagnosis of amoebiasis. Diagnosis for G. intestinalis and C. parvum/C. hominis with the BD MAXTM enteric parasite panel was equivalent to that with microscopy. We believe that E. histolytica must be diagnosed with nucleic acid amplification tests that have a high sensitivity and specificity like EPP assay in certain patient groups.
- 650 _2
- $a dospělí $7 D000328
- 650 _2
- $a kryptosporidióza $x epidemiologie $x parazitologie $7 D003457
- 650 _2
- $a Cryptosporidium $x izolace a purifikace $7 D003458
- 650 _2
- $a Cryptosporidium parvum $x izolace a purifikace $7 D016785
- 650 _2
- $a Entamoeba histolytica $x izolace a purifikace $7 D004748
- 650 _2
- $a entamébóza $x epidemiologie $x parazitologie $7 D004749
- 650 _2
- $a feces $x parazitologie $7 D005243
- 650 _2
- $a ženské pohlaví $7 D005260
- 650 _2
- $a Giardia lamblia $x izolace a purifikace $7 D016829
- 650 _2
- $a giardiáza $x epidemiologie $x parazitologie $7 D005873
- 650 _2
- $a lidé $7 D006801
- 650 _2
- $a mužské pohlaví $7 D008297
- 650 _2
- $a lidé středního věku $7 D008875
- 650 _2
- $a prevalence $7 D015995
- 651 _2
- $a Turecko $x epidemiologie $7 D014421
- 655 _2
- $a časopisecké články $7 D016428
- 700 1_
- $a Celik, Tuncay $u Adiyaman University, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Microbiology, Adiyaman, Turkey.
- 773 0_
- $w MED00011006 $t Folia parasitologica $x 1803-6465 $g Roč. 67, č. - (2020)
- 856 41
- $u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32812530 $y Pubmed
- 856 41
- $u https://folia.paru.cas.cz/pdfs/fol/2020/01/20.pdf $y plný text volně přístupný
- 910 __
- $a ABA008 $b online $c $y p $z 0
- 990 __
- $a 20210119 $b ABA008
- 991 __
- $a 20210119091113 $b ABA008
- 999 __
- $a ok $b bmc $g 1611086 $s 1121546
- BAS __
- $a 3
- BAS __
- $a PreBMC
- BMC __
- $a 2020 $b 67 $c - $e 20200807 $i 1803-6465 $m Folia parasitologica $n Folia parasitol. $x MED00011006
- LZP __
- $a Pubmed-20210119