Background: Giardia lamblia, a flagellate protozoa, is a one of the most common causes of non-viral (parasitic) diarrheal illness in humans. Laboratory diagnosis mainly consists of direct microscopic examination of stool specimen for trophozoites and cysts. However, due to intermittent fecal excretion of the parasite, the patient may be misdiagnosed, continue excreting the parasite and infecting others. Therefore, other methods of diagnosis should be looked for, which overcome the drawbacks of microscopy when used alone for diagnosis. The present study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of coproantigen detection by ELISA test in comparison to direct microscopy in the diagnosis of G. lamblia in stool specimens from patients with diarrhea and other gastrointestinal symptoms. Patients and methods: stool samples were collected form 250 child included in the present study (150 symptomatic and 100 apparently healthy as a control group) aged between 1-10 years old, and subjected for direct microscopic examination and ELISA test for copro-antigen detection. Results: out of 250 stool samples, 53 specimens (21.2%) were positive for Giardia by direct microscopy, while 68 specimens (27.2%) were positive by ELISA test. Conclusion: ELISA test for copro-antigen detection in stool samples is a rapid and effective method with high sensitivity and specificity for diagnosis of giardiasis in stool specimens even when the parasitic count is low, thus reducing the chances of missing even in the asymptomatic cases.

No abstract

This study was aimed to determine whether serum thirodoxine reductase (TR) levels would be a prognostic marker or risk assessment factor in patients with prostate cancer and to investigate whether it could differentiate prostate cancer (PCa) from benign prostate hyperplasia (BPH). PATIENTS AND METHODS We enrolled 35 patients with PCa subclassified into 2 groups (group1 PCa: 11 patients with Prostate specific antigen (PSA) less than 10 ng/ml and group2 PCa: 24 patients with PSA more than 10 ng/ml)), 42 patients with BPH, and 27 healthy individuals. Serum TR and PSA levels was measured by ELISA and was compared among all groups. All statistical analyses were calculated using ANOVA software and graph pad prism version 6. RESULTS We found statistically significantly increased levels of TR in serum of patients diagnosed with PCa (group 1 and 2 PCa) vs. patients with BPH and healthy subjects at P≤0.0001 while there was no significant difference in PSA level between group 1 PCa and control (BPH and healthy) CONCLUSION The assessment of serum TR in addition to PSA appears to be of great benefit for a more accurate differential diagnosis of BPH and PCa.