These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Species-specific field testing of Entamoeba spp. in an area of high endemicity.
    Author: Heckendorn F, N'Goran EK, Felger I, Vounatsou P, Yapi A, Oettli A, Marti HP, Dobler M, Traoré M, Lohourignon KL, Lengeler C.
    Journal: Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg; 2002; 96(5):521-8. PubMed ID: 12474480.
    Abstract:
    Entamoeba histolytica has been separated in recent years into 2 morphologically identical species: the apathogenic E. dispar and the pathogenic E. histolytica, only the latter being pathogenic. Although various laboratory techniques allow discrimination between the 2 species there is a lack of field data about the suitability of available diagnostic tests for use in epidemiological studies and few epidemiological studies using species-specific diagnosis have been performed at community level in endemic areas, especially in sub-Saharan Africa. We conducted a repeated cross-sectional study of 967 schoolchildren in central Côte d'Ivoire to compare and evaluate light microscopy, 2 different antigen detection assays, and one polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assay. Microscopy and a non-specific antigen capture Entamoeba enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) were used for the primary screening of all children (time t0). The prevalence of the E. histolytica/E. dispar species complex at t0 was 18.8% by single microscopical examination and 31.4% using the non-specific ELISA. Approximately 2 months after the initial screening, fresh stool specimens were collected on 2 consecutive days (t1 and t2) from (i) all the children who were positive by microscopy at t0 (n = 182) and (ii) 155 randomly selected children who were negative at the primary screening. These samples were tested with a second antigen detection ELISA specific for E. histolytica (n = 238) and with a species-specific PCR assay (n = 193). The second and third examinations (t1 and t2) revealed an additional 43 infections with the species complex E. histolytica/E. dispar, so that the cumulative microscopical prevalence for t1 and t2 was 27.7%. The overall prevalence of E. histolytica by species-specific ELISA antigen detection was low (0.83%), while the prevalence of E. dispar was 15%. When analysing only microscopically positive samples by PCR (n = 129), the ratio E. histolytica: E. dispar was very low (1:46), suggesting that the vast majority of Entamoeba infections in this area were apathogenic. Both species-specific tests performed well but the ELISA was easier to use for large-scale field screening.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]