Literature DB >> 12606092

Predictive values and quality control of techniques for the diagnosis of Echinococcus multilocularis in definitive hosts.

J Eckert1.   

Abstract

By the end of the 1980s the only reliable technique for diagnosing the intestinal Echinococcus multilocularis infection of definitive hosts was parasite detection at necropsy. Currently, several techniques for the post mortem and in vivo diagnosis are available, including classical and modern methods. The sedimentation and counting technique (SCT) is used for the exact determination of the worm burden in the intestine after necropsy. The SCT has high sensitivity and specificity values (both close to 100%) and can be regarded as 'gold standard'. The principle of the intestinal scraping technique (IST) is the stereomicroscopic examination of at least 15 intestinal thick smears. This technique has a sensitivity of 78% and a specificity approximating 100%. In recent years, the IST has been successfully used in large post mortem surveys of foxes for E. multilocularis. The newer techniques for detecting coproantigens by ELISA (CA-ELISA) exhibit rather high sensitivities between 84 and 95%, combined with very high specificities of >96%, the latter regarding non-Echinococcus cestodes and other parasites. However, cross-reactivity may occur with E. granulosus. Copro-DNA detection by PCR is also highly sensitive (89-94%) and specific (100%). With the SCT, IST and Copro-PCR one person can only examine about 10-20 animals per day, whereas the CA-ELISA allows the examination of 200 samples. Therefore, the latter test is suited for mass-screening of definitive host populations. Both the CA-ELISA and the Copro-PCR allow the examination of materials from dead and living animals, including faecal samples collected in the field. Quite often diagnostic techniques have been used without adequate quality control and proper definition of their performance characteristics, including diagnostic sensitivity, specificity, predictive values and some other parameters. Examples are presented with the aim to demonstrate the need and the value of calculating the predictive values for assays used to diagnose the E. multilocularis infection in individual animals and in definitive host populations.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12606092     DOI: 10.1016/s0001-706x(02)00216-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Acta Trop        ISSN: 0001-706X            Impact factor:   3.112


  19 in total

1.  Scraping or shaking--a comparison of methods for the quantitative determination of Echinococcus multilocularis in fox intestines.

Authors:  Georg Duscher; Heinrich Prosl; Anja Joachim
Journal:  Parasitol Res       Date:  2004-11-20       Impact factor: 2.289

2.  Comparative copro-diagnosis of Echinococcus multilocularis in experimentally infected foxes.

Authors:  M N S Al-Sabi'; C M O Kapel; P Deplazes; A Mathis
Journal:  Parasitol Res       Date:  2007-04-29       Impact factor: 2.289

3.  An improved method for the extraction and quantification of adult Echinococcus from wildlife definitive hosts.

Authors:  Karen Gesy; Michael Pawlik; Luciene Kapronczai; Brent Wagner; Brett Elkin; Helen Schwantje; Emily Jenkins
Journal:  Parasitol Res       Date:  2013-03-08       Impact factor: 2.289

4.  Immunodiagnosis of Echinococcus granulosus infection in dogs by counter immunoelectrophoresis (CIEP).

Authors:  Konanur Javaregowda Ananda; Placid Eugine D'Souza
Journal:  J Parasit Dis       Date:  2014-01-24

Review 5.  Biological, epidemiological, and clinical aspects of echinococcosis, a zoonosis of increasing concern.

Authors:  Johannes Eckert; Peter Deplazes
Journal:  Clin Microbiol Rev       Date:  2004-01       Impact factor: 26.132

6.  Rapid and Reliable Detection of Echinococcus multilocularis from Faeces Using Droplet Digital PCR.

Authors:  Fabian Bagó; Franz Hoelzl; Felix Knauer; Anna Kübber-Heiss; Steve Smith
Journal:  Acta Parasitol       Date:  2020-12-21       Impact factor: 1.440

7.  Combining information from surveys of several species to estimate the probability of freedom from Echinococcus multilocularis in Sweden, Finland and mainland Norway.

Authors:  Helene Wahlström; Marja Isomursu; Gunilla Hallgren; Dan Christensson; Maria Cedersmyg; Anders Wallensten; Marika Hjertqvist; Rebecca K Davidson; Henrik Uhlhorn; Petter Hopp
Journal:  Acta Vet Scand       Date:  2011-02-11       Impact factor: 1.695

8.  Detection of Echinococcus multilocularis in carnivores in Razavi Khorasan province, Iran using mitochondrial DNA.

Authors:  Molouk Beiromvand; Lame Akhlaghi; Seyed Hossein Fattahi Massom; Iraj Mobedi; Ahmad Reza Meamar; Hormozd Oormazdi; Abbas Motevalian; Elham Razmjou
Journal:  PLoS Negl Trop Dis       Date:  2011-11-22

9.  Infection of dogs with Echinococcus granulosus: causes and consequences in an hyperendemic area.

Authors:  Raja Chaâbane-Banaoues; Myriam Oudni-M'rad; Jacques Cabaret; Selim M'rad; Habib Mezhoud; Hamouda Babba
Journal:  Parasit Vectors       Date:  2015-04-17       Impact factor: 3.876

10.  Differential Detection of Echinococcus Spp. Copro-DNA by Nested-PCR in Domestic and Wild Definitive Hosts in Moghan Plain, Iran.

Authors:  I Mobedi; M Zare-Bidaki; Mr Siavashi; Sr Naddaf; Eb Kia; M Mahmoudi
Journal:  Iran J Parasitol       Date:  2013-01       Impact factor: 1.012

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.