Sensitivity of microscopy versus enzyme immunoassay in the laboratory diagnosis of giardiasis
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.
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 2.Burke JA: The clinical and laboratory diagnosis of giardiasis. Critical Reviews of Clinical Laboratory Science 1977, 7: 372–391.Google Scholar
- 3.Nash TE, Herrington DA, Losonsky GA, Levine MM: Experimental human infections withGiardia lamblia. Journal of Infectious Diseases 1987, 56: 974–984.Google Scholar
- 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