Iqbal Jamshaid, Hira Parsotam R, Saroj Grover, Philip Reeni, Al-Ali Faiza, Madda Patrick J, Sher Ali
Department of Microbiology, Faculty of Medicine, Kuwait University, Safat, Kuwait.
J Clin Microbiol. 2002 Feb;40(2):475-9. doi: 10.1128/JCM.40.3.475-479.2001.
The present study evaluates the performances of three noninvasive serological assays for the detection of immunoglobulin G antibodies to leishmania antigen for the diagnosis of imported cases of kala azar (visceral leishmaniasis [VL]) in a country, Kuwait, where the disease is not endemic. A total of 323 individuals including 21 patients with documented cases of VL, 72 individuals with suspected cases of VL, 155 patients with other parasitic infections, and 75 healthy control individuals were tested by indirect hemagglutination assay (IHA; Behring Diagnostics GmbH, Marburg, Germany), indirect fluorescent-antibody assay (IFA; bioMerieux sa, Marcy l'Etoile, France), and a qualitative membrane-based immunoassay with recombinant leishmania antigen K39 (strip-test; Intersep Ltd, Berkshire, United Kingdom). Our data show that IHA is the most sensitive test (100%), followed by IFA (86.6%) and the strip-test (80.0%). The strip-test was the most specific (100%) of the three assays, followed by IFA (93.0%) and IHA (86.0%). However, the strip-test failed to detect at least three confirmed cases of VL. We conclude that IHA is preferred over IFA and the strip-test for the screening of individuals with suspected cases of VL, especially in a country where VL is not endemic and where the number of cases is regular but limited. The details about some of the patients with VL are presented to highlight the diversity of clinical presentations and problems encountered in the diagnosis of VL in a country where VL is not endemic.
本研究评估了三种非侵入性血清学检测方法在检测利什曼原虫抗原免疫球蛋白G抗体方面的性能,用于诊断科威特这个非内脏利什曼病(黑热病[VL])流行国家的输入性黑热病病例。总共323人接受了检测,其中包括21例确诊的黑热病患者、72例疑似黑热病患者、155例其他寄生虫感染患者以及75名健康对照个体,检测方法包括间接血凝试验(IHA;德国马尔堡贝林诊断有限公司)、间接荧光抗体试验(IFA;法国马西伊图瓦勒生物梅里埃公司)以及一种基于重组利什曼原虫抗原K39的定性膜免疫测定法(试纸条检测;英国伯克希尔Intersep有限公司)。我们的数据表明,IHA是最敏感的检测方法(100%),其次是IFA(86.6%)和试纸条检测(80.0%)。试纸条检测是三种检测方法中特异性最高的(100%),其次是IFA(93.0%)和IHA(86.0%)。然而,试纸条检测未能检测出至少三例确诊的黑热病病例。我们得出结论,对于筛查疑似黑热病病例的个体,IHA优于IFA和试纸条检测,特别是在一个非黑热病流行且病例数量虽有规律但有限的国家。文中还介绍了一些黑热病患者的详细情况,以突出在一个非黑热病流行国家诊断黑热病时临床表现的多样性和遇到的问题。