Looking for Cryptosporidium: the application of advances in detection and diagnosis

Abstract

The protozoan Cryptosporidium is a major public and animal health concern. Young children, immunocompromised people, and pre-weaning animals are especially vulnerable, but treatment options are limited and there is no vaccine. A laboratory diagnosis is required to confirm cases of cryptosporidiosis, and species and genotype determination is essential in distinguishing human from non-human sources, understanding transmission, and strengthening the epidemiological evidence for causative links in outbreaks. However, testing is not consistent, as demonstrated by investigation of a significant increase in cases in some European countries during 2012. Many methods employed are laborious and time-consuming; recent advances, translated into diagnostic assays, can improve testing and facilitate typing to support clinical and environmental investigations.

An audit of the laboratory diagnosis of cryptosporidiosis in England and Wales

“…The diagnostic sensitivity and specificity of EIAs marketed in the UK have been shown to be similar to those provided by AP microscopy (Chalmers et al, 2011). EIAs have the advantage of being readily automated, enabling higher throughput than microscopy (Chalmers & Katzer, 2013). The availability of EIAs for simultaneous detection of both Cryptosporidium and Giardia has been reported to improve laboratory diagnosis especially of the latter (Ellam et al, 2008).…”

“…The use of EIAs by nearly one-fifth of laboratories (Table 2) is a recent development; a comprehensive UK-wide audit carried out in 2008 found that EIAs were being used in only five of 200 (2.5 %) laboratories . The choice of diagnostic test depends on the number of specimens being tested, performance in local validation, available equipment and facilities, staff skills and training, time and cost considerations (Chalmers & Katzer, 2013). The diagnostic sensitivity and specificity of EIAs marketed in the UK have been shown to be similar to those provided by AP microscopy (Chalmers et al, 2011).…”

Risk factors and infection due to Cryptosporidium spp. in dogs and cats in southern Rio Grande do Sul

“…In order to maintain control over cryptosporidiosis, it is important to establish a specific diagnosis that makes it possible to analyze risk factors, plan interventions and identify outbreaks of the disease (CHALMERS & KATZER, 2013). Among the diagnostic methods available for detecting oocysts in hosts' feces, the fluorescence staining technique using auramine has shown the highest affinity for oocyst walls, and this method has been considered sensitive and rapid (McPHERSON & McQUEEN, 1993;HANSCHEID et al, 2008).…”

Criptosporidiose em animais domésticos: aspectos epidemiológicos

“…Dessa forma, a caracterização molecular de isolados de diferentes origens (animal, humana e ambiental) tem sido amplamente usada com o intuito de investigar o potencial zoonótico das espécies ou genótipos do protozoário (XIAO;FAYER, 2008). Atualmente, 26 espécies de Cryptosporidium são reconhecidas, sendo nove capazes de infectar humanos (ASSIS et al, 2013;SHARMA et al, 2013;KATZER, 2013), sendo que diversos grupos de subtipos e sub-genótipos de Cryptosporidium têm sido identificados, dos quais os subtipos Cryptosporidium parvum IIa e IId foram identificados como zoonóticos (PLUTZER; KARANIS, 2009;HELMY et al, 2013).…”

“…Os protozoários do gênero Cryptosporidium são parasitos intracelulares obrigatórios, pertencentes ao filo Apicomplexa e capazes de se desenvolver nas microvilosidades das células epiteliais do trato gastrintestinalde hospedeiros vertebrados (XIAO et al, 2004;ALDEYARBI, 2011;KATZER, 2013).…”