Comparação entre o xenodiagnóstico clássico e artificial na fase crônica da doença de Chagas

Pineda, Jorge Panameño; Luquetti, Alejandro Ostermayer; Castro, Cleudson Nery de

doi:10.1590/s0037-86821998000500008

Cited by 9 publications

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

Xenodiagnosis

Meiser¹,

Schaub²

2011

Nature Helps...

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In xenodiagnosis, the vector of a pathogenic agent is infected to make identification of the parasite easier after a period of multiplications. This enables a diagnosis if the strain of the pathogen possesses a low virulence or if very low numbers of parasites occur in the blood, for example Trypanosoma cruzi in the chronic phase of Chagas disease. In 1914, 5 years after the discovery of T. cruzi in the triatomines, its blood-sucking vectors, these were used for the first time as a diagnostic tool of this disease. For many decades thereafter xenodiagnosis represented the golden standard. Meanwhile serological and molecular biological methods are preferably used for diagnosis today, but xenodiagnosis and in vitro cultivation are still the best methods for a proof of the living parasites or for the isolation of the flagellate. In this context, the different methodological variations and the disadvantages and advantages of xenodiagnosis are discussed in our review.

show abstract

Xenodiagnosis

Meiser¹,

Schaub²

2011

Nature Helps...

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Detection of cross infections by Leishmania spp. and Trypanosoma spp. in dogs using indirect immunoenzyme assay, indirect fluorescent antibody test and polymerase chain reaction

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this study was to detect cross infections by Leishmania spp. and Trypanosoma spp. using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), indirect fluorescent antibody test (IFAT) and polymerase chain reaction (PCR). Thus, 408 blood samples were collected from dogs domiciled in Araçatuba Municipality, São Paulo State, Brazil; the dogs were of both sexes, of several breeds and aged 6 months. For Leishmania spp., 14.95% (61 out of 408) of dogs were reactive using IFAT. Positivity was 20.10% (82 out of 408) using ELISA and 29.66% (121 out of 408) using PCR, with significant differences for the sex and age of these animals (p < 0.05). For Trypanosoma spp., antibody occurrence using ELISA was 10.54% (43 out of 408), while PCR indicated 2.45% (10 out of 408) positive dogs. Using IFAT, 10.29% (42 out of 408) of animals were considered positive and only sex showed a significant difference (p < 0.05). In this study, 10.54% (43 out of 408) of animals were seropositive according to ELISA for Trypanosoma spp., of which 79.07% (34 out of 43) showed positive results in the molecular diagnosis for Leishmania spp., while of the 10.29% (42 out of 408) positive dogs according to IFAT, 95.24 % (40 out of 42) had confirmed infection by this parasite. The obtained results demonstrate evidence of cross infections by both protozoa in the animals analysed in this study.

show abstract