Determination of the Prevalence of Entamoeba Histolytica and E. Dispar in the Pernambuco State of Northeastern Brazil by a Polymerase Chain Reaction

Pinheiro, Sandra Maria Botelho; Carneiro, Rosa M.; Ivanise, S.; Irmão, João Inácio; Morais, Marcos Antônio de; Coimbra, Maria Raquel Moura; Carvalho, Luiz Bezerra de

doi:10.4269/ajtmh.2004.70.221

Cited by 31 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 27 publications

(33 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…High prevalence of E. dispar has been described in different countries [19,22,25,32,36]. Several studies that have investigated the prevalence of E. histolytica and E. dispar have not considered the presence of other species such as E. hartmanni and E. moshkovskii [19,22,23,36].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Several studies that have investigated the prevalence of E. histolytica and E. dispar have not considered the presence of other species such as E. hartmanni and E. moshkovskii [19,22,23,36]. These species were reported in areas of Ghana, Pondicherry and Bangladesh [37][38][39].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Several PCR assays designed to differentiate E. histolytica for E. dispar have been described [5,6,21,[22][23][24][25]32,33]. Most of them targeted either the small subunit ribosomal RNA gene or specific episomal repeats species.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In reference laboratories, PCR is the method of choice for differentiation between the pathogenic specie (E. histolytica) from the non-pathogenic (E. dispar). Many investigations have reported successful application of PCR to the diagnosis of amoebiasis as a tool for final confirmatory identification of intestinal amoebiasis [5,6,[20][21][22][23][24][25][26].…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Comparison of multiplex-PCR and antigen detection for differential diagnosis of Entamoeba histolytica

Santos¹,

Peralta²,

Macedo³

et al. 2007

Braz J Infect Dis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Amebiasis is an infection caused by Entamoeba histolytica. However, differentiation between E. histolytica and Entamoeba dispar, which are morphologically identical species, is essential for treatment decision, precaution of the invasive disease and public health. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate a Multiplex -PCR for detection and differentiation of E. histolytica from E. dispar from fresh stool samples in comparison with the coproantigen commercial ELISA. Microscopic examination of stools using the Coprotest method, detection of stool antigen by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay kit and a home made Multiplex-PCR, were used for the diagnosis of amoebiasis infection. Analysis of the 127 stools samples by microscopy examination demonstrated that only 27 (21%) samples were positive for E. histolytica/E. dispar complex. Among these stool samples, 11 were positive by Multiplex-PCR, with nine presenting the diagnostic fragment characteristic of E. dispar (96 bp) and two presenting diagnostic fragment of E. histolytica (132 bp). Among negative samples detected by microscopic examination, three positive samples for E. dispar and one positive for E. histolytica by Multiplex-PCR was observed. This denotes a low sensibility of microscopic examination when a single stool sample is analyzed. Assay for detection of E. histolytica antigen was concordant with multiplex-PCR in relation to E. histolytica. Statistical analysis comparing the sensibility tests was not done because of the low number of E. histolytica cases. The results demonstrate the importance of the specific techniques use for the differentiation between E. histolytica and E. dispar.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Comparison of multiplex-PCR and antigen detection for differential diagnosis of Entamoeba histolytica

Santos¹,

Peralta²,

Macedo³

et al. 2007

Braz J Infect Dis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…detected only E. dispar, whereas in Macaparana county, within the same state, all samples investigated by Pinheiro et al 28 tested negative in an E. histolytica-specifi c ELISA (TechLab®) and positive for E. dispar using a molecular biology method.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Laboratory diagnosis of amebiasis in a sample of students from southeastern Brazil and a comparison of microscopy with enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay for screening of infections with Entamoeba sp.

Pereira

Conceição

Maximiano

et al. 2014

Rev. Soc. Bras. Med. Trop.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

introduction:Epidemiological studies on amebiasis have been reassessed since Entamoeba histolytica and E. dispar were fi rst recognized as distinct species. Because the morphological similarity of these species renders microscopic diagnosis unreliable, additional tools are required to discriminate between Entamoeba species. The objectives of our study were to compare microscopy with ELISA kit (IVD®) results, to diagnose E. histolytica infection, and to determine the prevalence of amebiasis in a sample of students from southeastern Brazil. Methods: In this study, diagnosis was based on microscopy due to its capacity for revealing potential cysts/trophozoites and on two commercial kits for antigen detection in stool samples. Results: For 1,403 samples collected from students aged 6 to 14 years who were living in Divinópolis, Minas Gerais, Brazil, microscopy underestimated the number of individuals infected with E. histolytica/E. dispar (5.7% prevalence) compared with the ELISA kit (IVD®)-based diagnoses (15.7% for E. histolytica/E. dispar). A comparison of the ELISA (IVD®) and light microscopy results returned a 20% sensitivity, 97% specifi city, low positive predictive value, and high negative predictive value for microscopy. An ELISA kit (TechLab®) that was specifi c for E. histolytica detected a 3.1% (43/1403) prevalence for E. histolytica infection. Conclusions: The ELISA kit (IVD®) can be used as an alternative screening tool. The high prevalence of E. histolytica infection detected in this study warrants the implementation of actions directed toward health promotion and preventive measures.

show abstract

A case report: Entamoeba histolytica infections in the rhesus macaque, China

Jiang

Yang

Yu³

et al. 2008

Parasitol Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A case of amebic dysentery due to a natural infection of Entamoeba histolytica in the rhesus macaque (Macaca mullata) was reported. A fecal specimen was isolated and identified by the polymerase chain reaction technique. A daily dose of 750 mg of metronidazole was given orally for 10 days, and good results were observed. The early diagnosis of an E. histolytica infection allowed a proper antiamoebic treatment in an early stage of infection resulting in a successful outcome after therapy.

show abstract

Determination of the Prevalence of Entamoeba Histolytica and E. Dispar in the Pernambuco State of Northeastern Brazil by a Polymerase Chain Reaction

Cited by 31 publications

References 27 publications

Comparison of multiplex-PCR and antigen detection for differential diagnosis of Entamoeba histolytica

Comparison of multiplex-PCR and antigen detection for differential diagnosis of Entamoeba histolytica

Laboratory diagnosis of amebiasis in a sample of students from southeastern Brazil and a comparison of microscopy with enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay for screening of infections with Entamoeba sp.

A case report: Entamoeba histolytica infections in the rhesus macaque, China

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About