JCM Figure table search 04
Home Help [Feedback] [For Subscribers] [Archive] [Search] [Contents]
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowReprints and Permissions
Right arrow Copyright Information
Right arrow Books from ASM Press
Right arrow MicrobeWorld
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Iqbal, Z
Right arrow Articles by Rikihisa, Y
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Iqbal, Z
Right arrow Articles by Rikihisa, Y

 Previous Article  |  Next Article 

J Clin Microbiol. 1994 July; 32(7): 1658-1662

Comparison of PCR with other tests for early diagnosis of canine ehrlichiosis.

Z Iqbal, W Chaichanasiriwithaya and Y Rikihisa

Department of Veterinary Pathobiology, College of Veterinary Medicine, Ohio State University, Columbus 43210.

ABSTRACT

The purpose of the study was to compare the sensitivity of PCR with those of cell culture reisolation of Ehrlichia canis, the indirect fluorescent antibody test (IFA), and Western immunoblotting (WI) in the early diagnosis of canine ehrlichiosis. Five German shepherd dogs were intravenously inoculated with 10(7) E. canis-infected DH82 cells. Blood was collected on alternate days during a 2-week postinoculation period. Mononuclear cell fractions were harvested and used for E. canis reisolation and DNA extraction for PCR. The plasma was used for assaying antibodies against E. canis. By PCR, the 16S rRNA gene of E. canis was detected in the mononuclear cell specimens collected as early as day 4 to 10 postexposure (PE). E. canis was reisolated from the blood starting on day 2 PE from all five dogs. The indirect fluorescent antibody test and Western immunoblotting could detect E. canis antibodies as early as 2 to 8 days PE. Cell culture reisolation proved to be the most sensitive and definitive for early diagnosis of ehrlichiosis, but it is not very convenient, since it takes a long time (14 to 34 days) to show up positive. The sensitivity of PCR is comparable to or slightly less than that of other established methods; however, the convenience, quickness, and direct nature of detecting E. canis DNA is expected to make PCR more useful for clinical diagnosis.

J Clin Microbiol. 1994 July; 32(7): 1658-1662




This article has been cited by other articles:



Home Help [Feedback] [For Subscribers] [Archive] [Search] [Contents]
Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. Clin. Microbiol. Rev.
Clin. Vaccine Immunol. ALL ASM JOURNALS

Copyright © 1994 by the American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.