K-H Herbinger1, E Fleischmann, C Weber, P Perona, T Löscher, G Bretzel. 1. Department of Infectious Diseases and Tropical Medicine, University Hospital, Ludwig-Maximilians University of Munich, Leopoldstraße 5, 80802 Munich, Germany. herbinger@lrz.uni-muenchen.de
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Among travelers returning from the tropics, Entamoeba spp. are among the most frequently detected intestinal parasites, mainly the presumable apathogenic E. dispar and the pathogenic E. histolytica. METHODS: Among 5,378 travelers seeking diagnosis and treatment for intestinal infections at the travel clinic of the University of Munich between 2005 and 2009, 103 laboratory-confirmed amebiasis cases were detected. The study compares the results of various diagnostic tests among these patients, analyzes data on co-infections and clinical symptoms, and determines the risk for acquiring amebiasis. RESULTS: Initial screening tests (stool microscopy, coproantigen enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay [ELISA]) were positive in 82.5 and 93.9%, respectively. Fecal samples from patients with positive screening test results were subjected to polymerase chain reaction (PCR), which detected E. histolytica in 9.7% and E. dispar in 88.3% of the cases. The majority of E. histolytica cases and more than half of the E. dispar cases had intestinal symptoms typical for amebiasis. In 53.4% of the cases, intestinal co-infections were found, mostly Blastocystis hominis (39.8%), Giardia lamblia (10.7%), Campylobacter spp. (4.9%), and Salmonella typhi (2.9%). The risk for travelers to be infected with E. histolytica or E. dispar was highest for destinations in West Africa, East Africa, and South and South-East Asia. CONCLUSION: Stool microscopy and coproantigen ELISA are appropriate screening tests for intestinal Entamoeba infections among travelers, but intestinal co-infections are common. PCR is highly recommended as the diagnostic method of choice for the differentiation of Entamoeba spp. The presumable apathogenic E. dispar seems to provoke intestinal symptoms.
BACKGROUND: Among travelers returning from the tropics, Entamoeba spp. are among the most frequently detected intestinal parasites, mainly the presumable apathogenic E. dispar and the pathogenic E. histolytica. METHODS: Among 5,378 travelers seeking diagnosis and treatment for intestinal infections at the travel clinic of the University of Munich between 2005 and 2009, 103 laboratory-confirmed amebiasis cases were detected. The study compares the results of various diagnostic tests among these patients, analyzes data on co-infections and clinical symptoms, and determines the risk for acquiring amebiasis. RESULTS: Initial screening tests (stool microscopy, coproantigen enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay [ELISA]) were positive in 82.5 and 93.9%, respectively. Fecal samples from patients with positive screening test results were subjected to polymerase chain reaction (PCR), which detected E. histolytica in 9.7% and E. dispar in 88.3% of the cases. The majority of E. histolytica cases and more than half of the E. dispar cases had intestinal symptoms typical for amebiasis. In 53.4% of the cases, intestinal co-infections were found, mostly Blastocystis hominis (39.8%), Giardia lamblia (10.7%), Campylobacter spp. (4.9%), and Salmonella typhi (2.9%). The risk for travelers to be infected with E. histolytica or E. dispar was highest for destinations in West Africa, East Africa, and South and South-East Asia. CONCLUSION: Stool microscopy and coproantigen ELISA are appropriate screening tests for intestinal Entamoeba infections among travelers, but intestinal co-infections are common. PCR is highly recommended as the diagnostic method of choice for the differentiation of Entamoeba spp. The presumable apathogenic E. dispar seems to provoke intestinal symptoms.
Authors: M Leippe; S Ebel; O L Schoenberger; R D Horstmann; H J Müller-Eberhard Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 1991-09-01 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Joerg Blessmann; Heidrun Buss; Phuong A Ton Nu; Binh T Dinh; Quynh T Viet Ngo; An Le Van; Mohamed D Abd Alla; Terry F H G Jackson; Jonathan I Ravdin; Egbert Tannich Journal: J Clin Microbiol Date: 2002-12 Impact factor: 5.948
Authors: M J Gutiérrez-Cisneros; R Cogollos; R López-Vélez; P Martín-Rabadán; R Martínez-Ruiz; M Subirats; F J Merino; I Fuentes Journal: Ann Trop Med Parasitol Date: 2010-03
Authors: Ibne Karim M Ali; Mohammad Bakhtiar Hossain; Shantanu Roy; Patrick F Ayeh-Kumi; William A Petri; Rashidul Haque; C Graham Clark Journal: Emerg Infect Dis Date: 2003-05 Impact factor: 6.883
Authors: K-H Herbinger; M Metzner; V Schmidt; M Beissner; H D Nothdurft; F von Sonnenburg; T Löscher Journal: Infection Date: 2013-09-08 Impact factor: 3.553
Authors: Lynne S Garcia; Michael Arrowood; Evelyne Kokoskin; Graeme P Paltridge; Dylan R Pillai; Gary W Procop; Norbert Ryan; Robyn Y Shimizu; Govinda Visvesvara Journal: Clin Microbiol Rev Date: 2017-11-15 Impact factor: 26.132
Authors: Karl-Heinz Herbinger; Martin Alberer; Nicole Berens-Riha; Mirjam Schunk; Gisela Bretzel; Frank von Sonnenburg; Hans Dieter Nothdurft; Thomas Löscher; Marcus Beissner Journal: Am J Trop Med Hyg Date: 2016-02-22 Impact factor: 2.345
Authors: Karl-Heinz Herbinger; Ingrid Hanus; Mirjam Schunk; Marcus Beissner; Frank von Sonnenburg; Thomas Löscher; Gisela Bretzel; Michael Hoelscher; Hans Dieter Nothdurft; Kristina Lydia Huber Journal: Am J Trop Med Hyg Date: 2016-08-15 Impact factor: 2.345