JCM Figure table search 04
Home Help [Feedback] [For Subscribers] [Archive] [Search] [Contents]
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
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 Haque, R.
Right arrow Articles by Petri, W. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Haque, R.
Right arrow Articles by Petri, W. A., Jr.

 Previous Article  |  Next Article 

Journal of Clinical Microbiology, February 1998, p. 449-452, Vol. 36, No. 2
0095-1137/98/$04.00+0
Copyright © 1998, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.

Comparison of PCR, Isoenzyme Analysis, and Antigen Detection for Diagnosis of Entamoeba histolytica Infection

Rashidul Haque,1 I. K. M. Ali,1 S. Akther,1 and William A. Petri Jr.2,*

International Centre for Diarrheal Disease Research, Dhaka, Bangladesh,1 and Departments of Medicine, Microbiology, and Pathology, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia2

Received 19 August 1997/Returned for modification 21 October 1997/Accepted 4 November 1997

The diagnosis of amebiasis by microscopic identification of the parasite in stool is insensitive and unable to distinguish the invasive parasite Entamoeba histolytica from the commensal parasite E. dispar. In this study, we have tested a PCR technique for the detection of E. histolytica and compared it with isoenzyme analysis and the TechLab E. histolytica-specific antigen detection test. The nested-PCR test we used is based on amplification of the small subunit rRNA gene of E. histolytica and E. dispar followed by restriction digest analysis of the PCR product. Single stool samples were obtained from 98 patients from Dhaka, Bangladesh, with diarrhea: 88 patients diagnosed by microscopy and/or culture with E. histolytica and/or E. dispar infection and 10 patients without infection. Isoenzyme analysis identified 53 of the infections as E. histolytica and 28 as E. dispar. PCR and isoenzyme identification of E. histolytica agreed in 96% (51 of 53) of amebic cultures. PCR for E. histolytica was negative in all 10 samples that were negative for E. histolytica by isoenzyme and antigen detection. PCR and antigen detection had comparable sensitivities when performed directly on fresh stool specimens, identifying 87% (46 of 53) and 85% (45 of 53), respectively, of E. histolytica infections identified by isoenzyme analysis. The correlation of results by antigen detection and PCR for identification of E. histolytica in stool was 93% (45 of 48 cases). Mixed infections with E. histolytica and E. dispar were detected by PCR in 14% (12 of 88) of cases. In conclusion, all three techniques for specific identification of E. histolytica in fresh stool showed excellent correlation. Only the TechLab E. histolytica antigen detection test was both rapid and technically simple.

* Corresponding author. Mailing address: Room 2115 MR4 Building, University of Virginia Health Sciences Center, Charlottesville, VA 22908. Phone: (804) 924-5621. Fax: (804) 924-0075. E-mail: wap3g{at}virginia.edu.

Journal of Clinical Microbiology, February 1998, p. 449-452, Vol. 36, No. 2
0095-1137/98/$04.00+0
Copyright © 1998, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.


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 © 1998 by the American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.