| Literature DB >> 29742865 |
Samah S Abdel Gawad1, Mousa A M Ismail2, Naglaa F A Imam2, Ahmed H A Eassa2, Enas Yahia Abu-Sarea1.
Abstract
Cryptosporidium species is an important cause of gastrointestinal infections globally. This study aimed to shed light on its role in diarrheic immunocompetent patients in Beni-Suef, Egypt and to compare three diagnostic methods. Two hundred diarrheic patients, 37±16.8 year old, were enrolled. Stool samples were examined by light microscopy, using modified Ziehl-Neelsen stain (MZN) for Cryptosporidium spp. oocysts. Coproantigens were detected by sandwich ELISA. DNA molecular diagnosis was done by nested PCR. PCR yielded the highest detection rates (21.0%), compared to ELISA (12.5%) and MZN staining method (9.5%). The higher infection rates were in 20-40 year-old group, followed by 40-60 year-old. Association between epidemiologic factors was statistically not significant; positivity and gender, clinical manifestations, residence, source or water, or contact with animals. Cryptosporidiosis is an important enteric parasitic infection in Beni-Suef and PCR remains the gold standard for diagnosis.Entities:
Keywords: Beni-Suef; Cryptosporidium; ELISA; PCR; modified Ziehl-Neelsen stain
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29742865 PMCID: PMC5976013 DOI: 10.3347/kjp.2018.56.2.113
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Korean J Parasitol ISSN: 0023-4001 Impact factor: 1.341
Fig. 1Graphic representation of age distribution of study population.
Descriptive statistics of patients’ demographics and history data
| Variable | No. (%) | |
|---|---|---|
| Gender | Male | 120 (60.0) |
| Female | 80 (40.0) | |
|
| ||
| Residence | Urban | 81 (40.5) |
| Rural | 119 (59.5) | |
|
| ||
| Animals at home | Yes | 145 (72.5) |
| No | 55 (27.5) | |
|
| ||
| Source of water | Tap water | 172 (86.0) |
| Filtered | 28 (14.0) | |
|
| ||
| Clinical manifestations | Abdominal pain | 130 (65.0) |
| Abdominal pain and vomiting | 32 (16.0) | |
| Abdominal pain and flatulence | 10 (5.0) | |
| Vomiting and fever | 16 (8.0) | |
| Flatulence | 1 (0.5) | |
| Abdominal pain, flatulence and fever | 1 (0.5) | |
| Abdominal pain and tenesmus | 10 (5.0) | |
Cryptosporidium positive samples by PCR, ELISA, and microscopy using MZN stain
| Test used | Status | No. (%) |
|---|---|---|
| PCR | Positive | 42 (21.0) |
| Negative | 158 (79.0) | |
|
| ||
| ELISA | Positive | 25 (12.5) |
| Negative | 175 (87.5) | |
|
| ||
| Microscopy using MZN | Positive | 19 (9.5) |
| Negative | 181 (90.5) | |
Comparison between PCR, ELISA, and microscopy results using MZN stain
| Tests used | PCR | Cohen’s Kappa value | Sensitivity (%) | Specificity (%) | PPV (%) | NPV (%) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||||||||
| Negative no. (%) | Positive no. (%) | ||||||||
| ELISA | Negative | 157 (89.7) | 18 (10.3) | <0.0001 | 0.664 | 57.1 | 99.4 | 96.0 | 89.7 |
| Positive | 1 (4.0) | 24 (96.0) | |||||||
|
| |||||||||
| Microscopy (MZN) | Negative | 158 (87.3) | 23 (12.7) | <0.0001 | 0.566 | 45.2 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 87.3 |
| Positive | 0 (0.0) | 19 (100) | |||||||
P-value calculated using chi-square test.
P-value calculated using Fischer’s exact test.
Fig. 2Agarose gel electrophoresis and nPCR results.
Fig. 3Cryptosporidium oocysts (MZN stain ×1,000).
Fig. 4ROC analysis of sensitivity and specificity of ELISA and microscopy with MZN stain.
Patient positivity by age groups vs PCR, ELISA, and microscopy using MZN stain
| Stratified age groups (year) | ELISA positive no. (%) | PCR positive no. (%) | Microscopic examination positive no. (%) | MZN stain positive no. (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1–10 | 1 (9.1) | 1 (9.1) | 2 (18.2) | 0 (0.0) |
| 11–20 | 3 (11.1) | 6 (22.2) | 8 (29.6) | 3 (11.1) |
| 21–30 | 5 (12.2) | 6 (14.6) | 9 (22.0) | 2 (4.9) |
| 31–40 | 7 (19.4) | 14 (38.9) | 11 (30.6) | 9 (25.0) |
| 41–50 | 2 (5.7) | 4 (11.4) | 11 (31.4) | 1 (2.9) |
| 51–60 | 6 (20.7) | 8 (27.6) | 7 (24.1) | 3 (10.3) |
| >60 | 1 (4.8) | 3 (14.3) | 6 (28.6) | 1 (4.8) |
| Total | 25 (12.5) | 42 (21.0) | 54 (27.0) | 19 (9.5) |
| 0.38 | 0.05 | 0.9 | 0.03 |
P-value calculated using likelihood ratio.
P-value calculated using chi square test.
Association between patients’ data and positivity by PCR results
| No. positive (%) | No. negative (%) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gender | Male | 93 (77.5) | 27 (22.5) | 0.6 |
| Female | 65 (81.3) | 15 (18.8) | ||
|
| ||||
| Residence | Urban | 63 (77.8) | 18 (22.2) | 0.7 |
| Rural | 95 (79.8) | 24 (20.2) | ||
|
| ||||
| Source of water | Tap water | 133 (77.3) | 39 (22.7) | 0.1 |
| Filtered water | 25 (89.3) | 3 (10.7) | ||
|
| ||||
| Animals at home | Yes | 43 (78.2) | 12 (21.8) | 0.86 |
| No | 115 (79.3) | 30 (20.7) | ||
|
| ||||
| Associated symptoms | Abdominal pain and vomiting | 25 (78.1) | 7 (21.9) | 0.81 |
| Abdominal pain | 107 (82.3) | 23 (17.7) | ||
| Flatulence | 1 (100.0) | 0 (0.0) | ||
| Vomiting and fever | 14 (87.5) | 2 (12.5) | ||
| Abdominal pain and flatulence | 5 (50.0) | 5 (50.0) | ||
| Abdominal pain, vomiting and fever | 0 (0.0) | 1 (100.0) | ||
| Abdominal pain and tenesmus | 6 (60.0) | 4 (40.0) | ||
P-value calculated using chi-square test.
P-value calculated using likelihood ratio.
Other parasites detected in stool samples by direct microscopy (n=200)
| Parasite | No. positive (%) |
|---|---|
| 28 (14.0) | |
| 12 (6.0) | |
| 7 (3.5) | |
| 5 (2.5) | |
| 2 (1.0) | |
| 1 (0.05) |