Sensitivity of microscopy versus enzyme immunoassay in the laboratory diagnosis of giardiasis

  • T. G. Mank
  • J. O. M. Zaat
  • A. M. Deelder
  • J. T. M. van Eijk
  • A. M. Polderman

Abstract

The substitution of enzyme immunoassay (EIA) techniques for microscopy as a screening tool forGiardia lamblia infection was assessed. Paired stool samples obtained within a ten-day period from 366 patients with persistent diarrhea were examined by microscopy. In addition, two commercially availableGiardia lamblia-specific ElAs were performed. Compared with microscopy, EIA for coproantigen detection was more sensitive, based on examination of either one or two stool samples. Repeated examinations increased the number of cases detected, more so for microscopy than EIA. The negative predictive values of the two EIAs performed on the first stool sample were 98.7% and 97.8%. The results show that EIA for detection of copro-antigens in a single stool sample may be almost as sensitive for identifyingGiardia infection as repeated microscopy on two sequential stool samples.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Danciger M, Lopez M: Numbers ofGiardia in the feces of infected children. American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene 1975, 24: 237–242.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Burke JA: The clinical and laboratory diagnosis of giardiasis. Critical Reviews of Clinical Laboratory Science 1977, 7: 372–391.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Nash TE, Herrington DA, Losonsky GA, Levine MM: Experimental human infections withGiardia lamblia. Journal of Infectious Diseases 1987, 56: 974–984.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Rendtorff RC: The experimental transmission of human intestinal protozoan parasites.Giardia lamblia cysts given in capsules. American Journal of Hygiene 1954, 59: 209–220.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Jokipii AMM, Jokipii L: Prepatency of giardiasis. Lancet 1977, 12: 1095–1097.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Mank TG, Zaat JOM, Blotkamp J, Polderman AM: Comparison of fresh versus sodium acetate acetic acid formalin preserved stool specimens for diagnosis of intestinal protozoal infections. European Journal of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases 1995, 14: 1076–1081.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Phelps CA, Hutson A: Estimating diagnostic accuracy using a fuzzy gold standard. Medical Decision Making 1995, 15: 44–57.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chappell CL, Marson CC:Giardia Antigen detection in patients with chronic gastrointestinal disturbances. Journal of Family Practice 1992, 35: 49–53.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hopkins RM, Deplazes P, Meloni BP, Reynoldson JA, Thompson RCA: A field and laboratory evaluation of a commercial ELISA for the detection ofGiardia coproantigens in humans and dogs. Transactions of the Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene 1993, 87: 39–41.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Schieven BC, Hussain Z: Evaluation of an enzyme immunoassay test kit for diagnosing infections withGiardia lamblia. Serodiagnosis and Immunotherapy in Infectious Diseases 1990, 4: 109–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Addis DG, Mathews HM, Stewart JM, Wahlquist SP, Williams RM, Finton RJ, Spencer HC, Juranek DD: Evaluation of a commercially available enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay forGiardia lamblia antigen in stool. Journal of Clinical Microbiology 1991, 29: 1137–1142.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Rosoff JD, Sanders CA, Sonnad SS, DeLay PR, Hadley WK, Vincenzi FF, Yajko DM, O'Hanley PD: Stool diagnosis of giardiasis using a commercially available enzyme immunoassay to detect Giardia-specific antigen 65 (GSA 65). Journal of Clinical Microbiology 1989, 27: 1997–2002.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Tee GH, Moody AH, Hunt Cooke A, Chiodine PL: Comparison of techniques for detecting antigens ofGiardia lamblia andCryptosporidium parvum in faeces. Journal of Clinical Pathology 1993, 46: 555–558.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Marti H, Koella JC: Multiple stool examinations for ova and parasites and rate of false-negative results. Journal of Clinical Microbiology 1993, 31: 3044–3045.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    De Vlas SJ, Gryseels B, Van Oortmarssen GJ, Polderman AM, Habbema JDF: A model for variations in single and repeated egg counts inSchistosoma mansoni infections. Parasitology 1992, 104: 451–460.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© MMV Medizin Verlag GmbH 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  • T. G. Mank
    • 1
  • J. O. M. Zaat
    • 2
  • A. M. Deelder
    • 3
  • J. T. M. van Eijk
    • 2
  • A. M. Polderman
    • 3
  1. 1.General Practitioners LaboratoryVK HaarlemThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Institute for Research in Extramural MedicineVrije Universiteit AmsterdamBT AmsterdamThe Netherlands
  3. 3.Department of ParasitologyLeiden UniversityRC LeidenThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations