Gastrointestinal parasites in Sydney

Jc, Walker; Bahr, Guillermo; As, Ehl

doi:10.5694/j.1326-5377.1985.tb123154.x

Cited by 18 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Although studies have been published on the clinical relevance of D. fragilis [12][13][14][15][16][17], the pathogenic properties of D. fragilis have not yet been completely elucidated. The D. fragilis prevalence found in the present study with microscopy alone (17.4%) is higher than reported elsewhere, ranging from <1% [15,18] to 16.8% [19]. Positive microscopy results were confirmed by PCR in 64 of 69 samples (92.7%).…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 67%

“…Positive microscopy results were confirmed by PCR in 64 of 69 samples (92.7%). PCR has shown a specificity approaching 100% [4,19]. Comparison of our results with those of previous publications remains difficult, because of differences in almost every aspect, including definitions of signs and symptoms, clinical protocols for diagnosis, and laboratory methods.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 71%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Parasitological diagnosis combining an internally controlled real-time PCR assay for the detection of four protozoa in stool samples with a testing algorithm for microscopy

Coppenraet

Wallinga

Ruijs

et al. 2009

Clinical Microbiology and Infection

119

107

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Molecular detection of gastrointestinal protozoa is more sensitive and more specific than microscopy but, to date, has not routinely replaced time-consuming microscopic analysis. Two internally controlled real-time PCR assays for the combined detection of Entamoeba histolytica, Giardia lamblia, Cryptosporidium spp. and Dientamoeba fragilis in single faecal samples were compared with Triple Faeces Test (TFT) microscopy results from 397 patient samples. Additionally, an algorithm for complete parasitological diagnosis was created. Real-time PCR revealed 152 (38.3%) positive cases, 18 of which were double infections: one (0.3%) sample was positive for E. histolytica, 44 (11.1%) samples were positive for G. lamblia, 122 (30.7%) samples were positive for D. fragilis, and three (0.8%) samples were positive for Cryptosporidium. TFT microscopy yielded 96 (24.2%) positive cases, including five double infections: one sample was positive for E. histolytica/Entamoeba dispar, 29 (7.3%) samples were positive for G. lamblia, 69 (17.4%) samples were positive for D. fragilis, and two (0.5%) samples were positive for Cryptosporidium hominis/Cryptosporidium parvum. Retrospective analysis of the clinical patient information of 2887 TFT sets showed that eosinophilia, elevated IgE levels, adoption and travelling to (sub)tropical areas are predisposing factors for infection with non-protozoal gastrointestinal parasites. The proposed diagnostic algorithm includes application of real-time PCR to all samples, with the addition of microscopy on an unpreserved faecal sample in cases of a predisposing factor, or a repeat request for parasitological examination. Application of real-time PCR improved the diagnostic yield by 18%. A single stool sample is sufficient for complete parasitological diagnosis when an algorithm based on clinical information is applied.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 67%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 71%

Parasitological diagnosis combining an internally controlled real-time PCR assay for the detection of four protozoa in stool samples with a testing algorithm for microscopy

Coppenraet

Wallinga

Ruijs

et al. 2009

Clinical Microbiology and Infection

119

107

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Dientamoeba is now often described as being more prevalent than Giardia. 8,30,38,40,48,[51][52][53][54][55][56][57][58][59][60][61][62][63] The prevalence of Dientamoeba lies between 0.3% and 52% depending on the study cohort and the diagnostic modality employed ( Table 1). It is important to note that most studies utilize light microscopy for diagnosis, which demonstrates inferior sensitivity compared to PCR or cultivation.…”

Section: A Review Of Dientamoeba Fragilis Carriage In Humansmentioning

confidence: 99%

A review ofDientamoeba fragiliscarriage in humans: Several reasons why this organism should be considered in the diagnosis of gastrointestinal illness

Barratt¹,

Harkness²,

Marriott³

et al. 2011

Gut Microbes

122

131

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Dientamoeba fragilis is a protozoan that inhabits the human gut. It is approximately 100 years since Dientamoeba's discovery and first description when it was described as a rare and harmless commensal. Since then it has struggled to gain recognition as a pathogen despite the evidence supporting its pathogenicity. Dientamoeba remains neglected, probably due to the misconceptions that it is uncommon and non-pathogenic. Usually, carriage of Dientamoeba is associated with symptoms such as abdominal pain and diarrhea. Moreover, antimicrobial therapy followed by resolution of symptoms coincides with the eradication of Dientamoeba. This manuscript reviews the scientific literature relating to Dientamoeba's prevalence and pathogenicity. While much of the evidence supporting its pathogenicity is only circumstantial, it is apparent that most researchers agree that Dientamoeba is pathogenic. Therefore, in symptomatic patients who harbor Dientamoeba and no other pathogen, Dientamoeba should be considered as the etiological agent and treated as such.

show abstract

“…It is likely that the Giardia spp in dogs and cats are readily transmissible to man. In Sydney Giardia intestinalis is more common in children of pre-school age than in adults (Walker et al 1985). Its distribution in man is suggestive of direct transmission from person to person but does not exclude the possibility of infection from dogs and cats.…”

Section: Experiments Imentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The possibility that human infections are acquired from companion animals has not been explored. However the high prevalence in dogs and cats and the relatively low prevalence in pre-school children (Walker et a/ 1985) suggests that pets only rarely serve as a source of infection for children.…”

Section: Experiments Imentioning

confidence: 99%