Comparison of stool antigen detection kits to PCR for diagnosis of amebiasis

DSpace/Manakin Repository

Search OPUS


Advanced Search

Browse

My Account

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.author Stark, D
dc.contributor.author Van Hal, S
dc.contributor.author Fotedar, R
dc.contributor.author Butcher, A
dc.contributor.author Marriott, D
dc.contributor.author Ellis, J
dc.contributor.author Harkness, J
dc.date.accessioned 2010-05-28T09:46:09Z
dc.date.issued 2008-05
dc.identifier.citation Journal of Clinical Microbiology, 2008, 46 (5), pp. 1678 - 1681
dc.identifier.issn 0095-1137
dc.identifier.other C1 en_US
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/10453/8895
dc.description.abstract The present study was conducted to compare two stool antigen detection kits with PCR for the diagnosis of Entamoeba histolytica infections by using fecal specimens submitted to the Department of Microbiology at St. Vincent's Hospital, Sydney, and the Institute of Medical and Veterinary Science, Adelaide, Australia. A total of 279 stool samples containing the E complex (E. histolytica, Entamoeba dispar, and Entamoeba moshkovskii) were included in this study. The stool specimens were tested by using two commercially produced enzyme immunoassays (the Entamoeba CELISA PATH and TechLab E. histolytica II kits) to detect antigens of E. histolytica. DNA was extracted from all of the samples with a Qiagen DNA stool mini kit (Qiagen, Hilden, Germany), and a PCR targeting the small-subunit ribosomal DNA was performed on all of the samples. When PCR was used as a reference standard, the CELISA PATH kit showed 28% sensitivity and 100% specificity. The TechLab ELISA (enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay) kit did not prove to be useful in detecting E. histolytica, as it failed to identify any of the E. histolytica samples which were positive by PCR. With the TechLab kit, cross-reactivity was observed for three specimens, one of which was positive for both E. dispar and E. moshkovskii while the other two samples contained E. moshkovskii. Quantitative assessment of the PCR and ELISA results obtained showed that the ELISA kits were 1,000 to 10,000 times less sensitive, and our results show that the CELISA PATH kit and the TechLab ELISA are not useful for the detection of E. histolytica in stool samples from patients in geographical regions where this parasite is not endemic. Copyright © 2008, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.
dc.language eng
dc.relation.isbasedon 10.1128/JCM.02261-07
dc.title Comparison of stool antigen detection kits to PCR for diagnosis of amebiasis
dc.type Journal Article
dc.description.version Published
dc.description.version Published
dc.parent Journal of Clinical Microbiology
dc.journal.volume 5
dc.journal.volume 46
dc.journal.number 5 en_US
dc.publocation Washington, USA en_US
dc.identifier.startpage 1678 en_US
dc.identifier.endpage 1681 en_US
dc.cauo.name SCI.Medical and Molecular Biosciences en_US
dc.conference Verified OK en_US
dc.for 0605 Microbiology
dc.personcode 100210
dc.personcode 104964
dc.personcode 100209
dc.personcode 044715
dc.personcode 910945
dc.percentage 100 en_US
dc.classification.name Microbiology en_US
dc.classification.type FOR-08 en_US
dc.edition en_US
dc.custom en_US
dc.date.activity en_US
dc.location.activity ISI:000255678200016 en_US
pubs.embargo.period Not known
pubs.organisational-group /University of Technology Sydney
pubs.organisational-group /University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Science
pubs.organisational-group /University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Science/School of Medical and Molecular Sciences
pubs.organisational-group /University of Technology Sydney/Strength - i3
utslib.copyright.status Closed Access
utslib.copyright.date 2015-04-15 12:17:09.805752+10
pubs.consider-herdc true


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record