Movatterモバイル変換


[0]ホーム

URL:


Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
Thehttps:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

NIH NLM Logo
Log inShow account info
Access keysNCBI HomepageMyNCBI HomepageMain ContentMain Navigation
pubmed logo
Advanced Clipboard
User Guide

Full text links

Elsevier Science full text link Elsevier Science
Full text links

Actions

Share

Comparative Study
.2005 Jul;110(3):322-6.
doi: 10.1016/j.exppara.2005.02.012. Epub 2005 Mar 23.

Comparison of two methods (microscopy and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay) for the diagnosis of amebiasis

Affiliations
Comparative Study

Comparison of two methods (microscopy and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay) for the diagnosis of amebiasis

Mehmet Tanyuksel et al. Exp Parasitol.2005 Jul.

Abstract

Diagnosis of amebiasis is usually performed on a clinical basis alone in most endemic countries having limited economic resources. This epidemiological study was conducted using modern diagnostic tests for amebiasis in the southeastern region of Turkey, an endemic area for amebiasis. The population of this study included patients with symptomatic diarrhea/dysentery attending both Yuzuncu Yil University, Van and Harran University, Sanliurfa, Turkey. A total of 380 stool specimens were collected and examined for Entamoeba by light microscopy (fresh, lugol, and trichrome staining) and stool antigen detection based- enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (EIA) test (TechLab Entamoeba histolytica II). 24% (91/380) of stool specimens were positive for E. histolytica/Entamoeba dispar trophozoites/cysts microscopically using trichrome staining. 13% (51/380) of the stool specimens were found to be positive for E. histolytica by the EIA test, including 15% (14/91) of microscopy (+) stool specimens and 13% (37/289) of microscopy (-) stool specimens. Enteric parasites were common in these populations with 66% (251/380) of the study population harboring more than one parasite. In addition to the 13% (51/380) of patients determined to have E. histolytica by EIA, eighty-six patients (22.6%) had Blastocystis hominis, 54 (14.2%) Entamoeba coli, 44 (11.5%) Giardia lamblia, 16 (4.2%) Chilomastix mesnili, 15 (3.9%) Iodamoeba bütschlii, 12 (3.1%) Hymenolepis nana, 9 (2.3%) Endolimax nana, 9 (2.3%) Dientamoeba fragilis, and 8 (2.1%) had Ascaris lumbricoides. We concluded that E. histolytica infection was found in 13% of the patients presenting with diarrhea in Van and Sanliurfa Turkey.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

Publication types

MeSH terms

Substances

Related information

Grants and funding

LinkOut - more resources

Full text links
Elsevier Science full text link Elsevier Science
Cite
Send To

NCBI Literature Resources

MeSHPMCBookshelfDisclaimer

The PubMed wordmark and PubMed logo are registered trademarks of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Unauthorized use of these marks is strictly prohibited.


[8]ページ先頭

©2009-2025 Movatter.jp