• Home
  • Browse
    • Current Issue
    • By Issue
    • By Author
    • By Subject
    • Author Index
    • Keyword Index
  • Journal Info
    • About Journal
    • Aims and Scope
    • Editorial Board
    • Publication Ethics
    • Indexing and Abstracting
    • Peer Review Process
  • Guide for Authors
  • Submit Manuscript
  • Previous Issues
  • Contact Us
 
  • Login
  • Register
Home Articles List Article Information
  • Save Records
  • |
  • Printable Version
  • |
  • Recommend
  • |
  • How to cite Export to
    RIS EndNote BibTeX APA MLA Harvard Vancouver
  • |
  • Share Share
    CiteULike Mendeley Facebook Google LinkedIn Twitter
Parasitologists United Journal
arrow Articles in Press
arrow Current Issue
Journal Archive
Volume Volume 18 (2025)
Volume Volume 17 (2024)
Volume Volume 16 (2023)
Issue Issue 3
Issue Issue 2
Issue Issue 1
Volume Volume 15 (2022)
Volume Volume 14 (2021)
Volume Volume 13 (2020)
Volume Volume 12 (2019)
Volume Volume 11 (2018)
Volume Volume 10 (2017)
Kafa, A., Çubuk, F., Aslan, R., Hasbek, M. (2023). Comparison of methods investigating Giardia intestinalis, Entamoeba histolytica, and Cryptosporidium spp. in stool samples of patients with diarrhea. Parasitologists United Journal, 16(3), 171-176. doi: 10.21608/puj.2023.231013.1220
Ayşe Kafa; Fatih Çubuk; Rukiye Aslan; Mürşit Hasbek. "Comparison of methods investigating Giardia intestinalis, Entamoeba histolytica, and Cryptosporidium spp. in stool samples of patients with diarrhea". Parasitologists United Journal, 16, 3, 2023, 171-176. doi: 10.21608/puj.2023.231013.1220
Kafa, A., Çubuk, F., Aslan, R., Hasbek, M. (2023). 'Comparison of methods investigating Giardia intestinalis, Entamoeba histolytica, and Cryptosporidium spp. in stool samples of patients with diarrhea', Parasitologists United Journal, 16(3), pp. 171-176. doi: 10.21608/puj.2023.231013.1220
Kafa, A., Çubuk, F., Aslan, R., Hasbek, M. Comparison of methods investigating Giardia intestinalis, Entamoeba histolytica, and Cryptosporidium spp. in stool samples of patients with diarrhea. Parasitologists United Journal, 2023; 16(3): 171-176. doi: 10.21608/puj.2023.231013.1220

Comparison of methods investigating Giardia intestinalis, Entamoeba histolytica, and Cryptosporidium spp. in stool samples of patients with diarrhea

Article 2, Volume 16, Issue 3, December 2023, Page 171-176  XML PDF (347.55 K)
Document Type: Original Article
DOI: 10.21608/puj.2023.231013.1220
View on SCiNiTO View on SCiNiTO
Authors
Ayşe Kafa* 1; Fatih Çubuk2; Rukiye Aslan3; Mürşit Hasbek1
1Sivas Cumhuriyet University, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Medical Microbiology, Sivas
2Ministry of Health General Directorate of Public Health, Department of Microbiology Reference Laboratory and Biological Products, Ankara
3Sivas Cumhuriyet University, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Medical Microbiology, Sivas & Sivas Cumhuriyet University, Vocational School of Health Services, Department of Medical Services and Techniques, Sivas , Türkiye
Abstract
Background: Intestinal protozoan infections (IPIs), common all over the world, are an important public
health problem, especially in developing countries. Different diagnostic methods are used for the diagnosis
of causative agents in diarrhea cases.
Objective: This study aims to analyze results of direct microscopy, coproantigen detection test, and PCR
technique in diagnosis of G. intestinalis, E. histolytica/dispar, and Cryptosporidium spp. in stool samples of
patients with diarrhea.
Subjects and Methods: Fresh stool samples were collected from 683 patients complaining of diarrhea,
and simultaneously examined by direct microscopy, commercial rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) for detection
of coproantigens, and molecularly using PCR technique.
Results: The overall detection rate of parasites was 3.7% by direct microscopy, 6.6% by RDTs and 2%
by PCR technique. Moderate, and weak fits were recorded between direct microscopy and RDTs results
(Kappa=0.46, P<0.001), and between direct microscopy and PCR technique results (Kappa=0.236,
P<0.001), respectively. No fit (Kappa=0.108, P=0.001) was recorded between coproantigen detection test
and PCR technique results.
Conclusion: It was concluded that direct microscopy and RDTs will be the correct approach in the
first instance in the suspicion of IPIs. Despite high cost of PCR technique, it should be considered in
differentiation between pathogenic and non-pathogenic amoeba, and genotyping of Cryptosporidium spp.
Keywords
coproantigens; diagnostic methods; intestinal protozoa; microscopy; PCR; rapid diagnostic tests
Statistics
Article View: 274
PDF Download: 725
Home | Glossary | News | Aims and Scope | Sitemap
Top Top

Journal Management System. Designed by NotionWave.