Download PDF
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · J Lab Physicians 2022; 14(02): 125-131
DOI: 10.1055/s-0041-1732488
Original Article

A Comparative Analysis of Microscopy, Coproantigen Serology, and Nested Multiplex PCR in the Laboratory Diagnosis of Entamoeba histolytica Infection

Sindhusuta Das
1   Department of Microbiology, Jawaharlal Institute of Postgraduate Medical Education & Research, Puducherry, India
,
Nonika Rajkumari
1   Department of Microbiology, Jawaharlal Institute of Postgraduate Medical Education & Research, Puducherry, India
,
Anitha Gunalan
1   Department of Microbiology, Jawaharlal Institute of Postgraduate Medical Education & Research, Puducherry, India
,
Dhanalakshmi Rajavelu
1   Department of Microbiology, Jawaharlal Institute of Postgraduate Medical Education & Research, Puducherry, India
,
Jeby Jose Olickal
2   Department of Preventive and Social Medicine, Jawaharlal Institute of Postgraduate Medical Education & Research, Puducherry, India
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
Also available at
   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Objectives Amoebiasis is caused by the most common intestinal protozoan parasite Entamoeba histolytica. This parasite causes amoebic colitis, which is manifested by diarrhea, followed by dysentery. The laboratory diagnosis of intestinal amoebiasis in most cases is by microscopic examination of stool samples. Other nonroutine methods include coproantigen enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) from stool samples, serum ELISA for antibodies, stool culture, isoenzyme analysis, and polymerase chain reaction (PCR). The present study aimed to comparatively analyze the different diagnostic modalities used for the detection of E. histolytica from the stool sample of patients with intestinal amoebiasis.

Materials and Methods This study was undertaken with 631 patients, during a period of 3 years, from January 2017 to December 2019. Stool specimen obtained from each patient was subjected to direct microscopic wet mount examination, coproantigen ELISA, and nested multiplex PCR, respectively.

Results Out of all the patients tested, 5.2% were positive for E. histolytica. Among the positive cases, stool microscopy was positive in 3.17%, coproantigen ELISA was positive in 29 (4.6%) cases, and PCR was positive in 30 (4.75%) cases.

Statistical Analysis The prevalence of E. histolytica infection was summarized as percentages. The three diagnostic tests done were statistically analyzed, taking microscopy as the gold standard. The agreement between techniques (microscopy, coproantigen ELISA, and PCR) was analyzed with kappa statistics. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and diagnostic accuracy were summarized as percentage with 95% confidence interval.

Conclusion In all suspected amoebiasis cases, a combination of stool microscopy, coproantigen testing with molecular detection of the parasite offers the best approach to diagnosis of this parasitic infection.

Keywords

amoebiasis - coproantigen testing - Entamoeba histolytica - amoebic colitis - amoebic dysentery


Publication History

Article published online:
29 July 2021

© 2021. The Indian Association of Laboratory Physicians. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial-License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Pvt. Ltd.
A-12, 2nd Floor, Sector 2, Noida-201301 UP, India

 

  • References

  • 1 Zulfiqar H, George M, Shawn H. “Amebiasis.” In StatPearls Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing, 2020 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK519535/ Accessed June 11, 2021
  • 2 Fotedar R, Stark D, Beebe N, Marriott D, Ellis J, Harkness J. Laboratory diagnostic techniques for Entamoeba species. Clin Microbiol Rev 2007; 20 (03) 511-532
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Singh PP. Infectious Diseases and Your Health. First edition. Singapore: Springer 2018
  • 4 Kantor M, Abrantes A, Estevez A. et al. Entamoeba histolytica: updates in clinical manifestation, pathogenesis, and vaccine development. Can J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2018; 2018: 4601420
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Wang H, Naghavi M, Allen C. et al. GBD 2015 Mortality and Causes of Death Collaborators. Global, regional, and national life expectancy, all-cause mortality, and cause-specific mortality for 249 causes of death, 1980-2015: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2015. Lancet 2016; 388 (10053) 1459-1544
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Shirley DT, Farr L, Watanabe K, Moonah S. A review of the global burden, new diagnostics, and current therapeutics for amebiasis. Open Forum Infect Dis 2018; 5 (07) ofy161
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Shimokawa C, Kabir M, Taniuchi M. et al. Entamoeba moshkovskii is associated with diarrhea in infants and causes diarrhea and colitis in mice. J Infect Dis 2012; 206 (05) 744-751
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Parija SC, Mandal J, Ponnambath DK. Laboratory methods of identification of Entamoeba histolytica and its differentiation from look-alike Entamoeba spp. Trop Parasitol 2014; 4 (02) 90-95
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Garcia LS, Arrowood M, Kokoskin E. et al. Practical guidance for clinical microbiology laboratories: laboratory diagnosis of parasites from the gastrointestinal tract. Clin Microbiol Rev 2017; 31 (01) e00025-17 DOI: 10.1128/CMR.00025-17.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Khairnar K, Parija SC. A novel nested multiplex polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assay for differential detection of Entamoeba histolytica, E. moshkovskii and E. dispar DNA in stool samples. BMC Microbiol 2007; 7: 47 DOI: 10.1186/1471-2180-7-47.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Tharmaratnam T, Kumanan T, Iskandar MA. et al. Entamoeba histolytica and amoebic liver abscess in northern Sri Lanka: a public health problem. Trop Med Health 2020; 48 (01) 2 DOI: 10.1186/s41182-020-0193-2.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Tanyuksel M, Petri Jr WA. Laboratory diagnosis of amebiasis. Clin Microbiol Rev 2003; 16 (04) 713-729
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Garcia LS, Bruckner DA. Diagnostic Medical Parasitology. 3rd edition. Washington, D.C.: ASM Press; 1997
  • 14 Markell EK, John DT, Krotoski WA. Lumen-Dwelling Protozoa. 8th edition. Philadelphia: The W. B. Saunders Co.; 1999
  • 15 Proctor EM. Laboratory diagnosis of amebiasis. Clin Lab Med 1991; 11 (04) 829-859 PubMedWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Palmer J. Modified iron hematoxylin/kinyoun stain. Clin Microbiol Newsl 1991; 13: 39-40 (Letter.) [Google Scholar]
    Google Scholar
  • 17 Scholten TH, Yang J. Evaluation of unpreserved and preserved stools for the detection and identification of intestinal parasites. Am J Clin Pathol 1974; 62 (04) 563-567 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Yang J, Scholten T. A fixative for intestinal parasites permitting the use of concentration and permanent staining procedures. Am J Clin Pathol 1977; 67 (03) 300-304 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 “CDC - DPDx - Diagnostic Procedures - Stool Specimens,” January 9, 2019. https://www.cdc.gov/dpdx/diagnosticprocedures/stool/specimencoll.html. Accessed June 12, 2021
  • 20 “CDC - DPDx - Amebiasis - Laboratory Diagnosis.” Accessed July 16, 2020. https://www.cdc.gov/dpdx/amebiasis/dx.html
  • 21 el-Hamshary EM, el-Shewy KA, Hegazy MM, Zakaria H. Diagnostic potentials of copro-antigen detection based ELISA, compared to microscopy in intestinal amoebiasis. J Egypt Soc Parasitol 2004; 34 (02) 601-610
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 BayousA,TahaM,TarekZ,HeshamG,WallE. Coproantigen versus classical microscopy as a diagnostic tool for entamoeba histolytica infection in the egyptian patients. Egypt J Hosp Med 2019;74(6):1424–1427
  • 23 Urdaneta H, Guimarães S, Silva EF, Tavares CA. Entamoeba histolytica: detection of coproantigens by purified antibody in the capture sandwich ELISA. Rev Inst Med Trop São Paulo 1994; 36 (06) 539-545
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Kabil SM, Hassan MM, Atta M. el Ghysha O. ELISA in detection of Entamoeba histolytica antigens in stools. J Egypt Soc Parasitol 1990; 20 (02) 673-676
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Petri Jr WA, Singh U. Diagnosis and management of amebiasis. Clin Infect Dis 1999; 29 (05) 1117-1125
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Haque R, Ali IKM, Akther S. Petri WA Jr. Comparison of PCR, isoenzyme analysis, and antigen detection for diagnosis of Entamoeba histolytica infection. J Clin Microbiol 1998; 36 (02) 449-452
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Saidin S, Othman N, Noordin R. Update on laboratory diagnosis of amoebiasis. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 2019; 38 (01) 15-38
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Gonin P, Trudel L. Detection and differentiation of Entamoeba histolytica and Entamoeba dispar isolates in clinical samples by PCR and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. J Clin Microbiol 2003; 41 (01) 237-241
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Blessmann J, Heidrun B, Phuong A. et al. Real-time PCR for detection and differentiation of Entamoeba histolytica and Entamoeba dispar in fecal samples. J Clin Microbiol 2002; 40 (12) 4413-4417
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Weitzel T, Cabrera J, Rosas R. et al. Enteric multiplex PCR panels: a new diagnostic tool for amoebic liver abscess?. New Microbes New Infect 2017; 18: 50-53
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar