Tropical Disease Unit, Toronto General Hospital, 200 Elizabeth Street, 13th Floor, North Wing, Room 1350, Toronto, ON M5G 1C4, Canada.
J Clin Microbiol. 2011 Mar;49(3):1097-100. doi: 10.1128/JCM.02457-10. Epub 2010 Dec 22.
We compared traditional cutaneous leishmaniasis diagnostic methods to filter paper lesion impression (FPLI) PCR for secondarily infected ulcers and nonulcerative lesions. The sensitivity and specificity of FPLI PCR for secondarily infected lesions (n = 8) were 100%. In primarily nonulcerative lesions (n = 15), the sensitivity of FPLI PCR was inferior to that of pooled-invasive-specimen PCR (72.7% versus 100%) (P = 0.10). FPLI PCR is sensitive, specific, and unlike invasive procedures, can be used in secondarily infected ulcers. Invasive specimen collection is superior in nonulcerative lesions.
我们比较了传统的皮肤利什曼病诊断方法和滤纸病变印迹(FPLI)PCR 对继发感染性溃疡和非溃疡性病变的检测效果。FPLI PCR 对继发感染性病变(n = 8)的敏感性和特异性均为 100%。在原发性非溃疡性病变(n = 15)中,FPLI PCR 的敏感性低于集合侵入性样本 PCR(72.7%对 100%)(P = 0.10)。FPLI PCR 具有敏感性、特异性,与侵入性操作不同,可用于继发感染性溃疡。在非溃疡性病变中,侵入性标本采集更优。