2019
DOI: 10.1016/j.jiph.2018.10.137
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Diagnostic accuracy of rapid diagnostic tests for the early detection of leptospirosis

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
22
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

4
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 26 publications
(22 citation statements)
references
References 16 publications
0
22
0
Order By: Relevance
“…For serology, all serum samples were subjected to MAT as described earlier [ 14 ]. MAT was performed using a panel of 20 local and international serovars comprising of pathogenic and non-pathogenic leptospires.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…For serology, all serum samples were subjected to MAT as described earlier [ 14 ]. MAT was performed using a panel of 20 local and international serovars comprising of pathogenic and non-pathogenic leptospires.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Detection of Leptospira based on visualization (microscopy examination) and culture had been considered ineffective as microscopy could not detect the low number of Leptospira in clinical specimens [10,11] with its low specificity [12] and the need for long incubation period (minimum four weeks) for culture. Serological kits such as enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and rapid tests are also available, however, most suffer from low sensitivity and specificity [13][14][15][16]. Currently, the confirmatory methods for diagnosis of leptospirosis include the serology based microscopic agglutination test (MAT) and molecular-based polymerase-chain reaction (PCR).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To determine the seropositivity, all serum samples were subjected to MAT as described earlier [15]. For molecular detection and identification, a 242 bp lipL32 fragment (primers: LipL32-45F: AAGCATTACCGCTTGTGGTG, LipL32-286R: GAACTC CCATTTCAGCGA TT, probe: LipL32-189P: FAM-5 0 -AAAGCCAGGACAAGCGCCG-3 0 -BHQ1) [16] which is only present in pathogenic Leptospira and the 547 bp fragment of 16S rDNA (rrs) nested PCR assays (outer primers: rrsouter-F: CTCAGAACTAACGCTGGCGGCGCG, rrs-outer-R: GGTTCGT TACTGAGGGTTAAAACCCCC, inner primers: rrs-inner-F: CTGGCGGCGCGTCTTA, rrsinner-R: GTTTTCACACCTGACTTACA) [17] were performed in all samples.…”
Section: Serology and Molecular Characterizationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The samples positive by 16S rDNA were subjected to sequencing (MyTACG Bioscience Enterprise, Malaysia) to identify the infecting Leptospira species [1]. The serovars used for MAT assay comprised Australis, Autumnalis, Batavia, Canicola, Celledoni, Grippotyphosa, Hardjoprajitno, Icterohaemorrhagiae, Javanica, Pyrogenes, Tarrasovi, Djasiman, Patoc, Pomona (international serovars were obtained from World Health Organization, WHO) and IMR LEP 1; saprophyte, IMR LEP 115; saprophyte, IMR LEP 175; saprophyte, IMR LEP 803/11-Copenhageni, IMR LEP 27-Hardjobovis, IMR LEP 22-Lai (local serovars were obtained from the Institute for Medical Research (IMR), Federal Territory of Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia [19,20].…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%