tab001wpc: Advantages and disadvantages of currently available methods for the diagnosis of infection with Entamoeba histolytica

Expert Reviews in Molecular Medicine: http://www.expertreviews.org/
Accession information: (99)00060-5h.htm (shortcode: tab001wpc); 22 March 1999
Request PDF version Back to main article

Advantages and disadvantages of currently available methods for the diagnosis of infection with Entamoeba histolytica

Christopher D. Huston, Rashidul Haque and William A. Petri, Jr

*Table 1. Advantages and disadvantages of currently available methods for the diagnosis of infection with Entamoeba histolytica* (tab001wpc)**
			Sensitivity (%)
Method	Sample	Specific for E. histolytica?	Amoebic colitis	Liver abscess	Comments
Microscopy	Stool	No	25–60	8–44
Microscopy	Abscess fluid	Yes	Not applicable	25
ELISA antigen detection	Stool	Yes	90	Usually negative
ELISA antigen detection	Serum (early diagnosis)	Yes	65	100
ELISA antigen detection	Serum (late diagnosis)	Yes	Not determined	55–75
ELISA antigen detection	Abscess fluid	Yes	Not applicable	100
PCR	Stool	Yes	90		Costly, labour-intensive
Culture and isoenzyme analysis	Stool	Yes	The 'gold standard'	The 'gold standard'	Costly, labour-intensive
Serological^a	Serum (acute infection)	Yes	75–85	70–80
Serological	Serum (convalescent infection)	Yes	>90	>90
^a The interpretation of serology data is complicated by high seroprevalence rates in endemic areas (see text for further explanation). Abbreviations used: ELISA = enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay; PCR = polymerase chain reaction.

Expert Reviews in Molecular Medicine © Cambridge University Press ISSN 1462-3994 (Disclaimer and copyright)
Editorial Office: Centre for Applied Research in Educational Technologies (CARET), 1st Floor, 16 Mill Lane, Cambridge, CB2 1SB, UK. Tel: +44 (0)1223 765 375; Fax: +44(0)1223 765 505; E-mail: ermm@caret.cam.ac.uk