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

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2001;15(1):14-8.
doi: 10.1002/1098-2825(2001)15:1<14::aid-jcla3>3.0.co;2-7.

Comparative sensitivity of six serological tests and diagnostic value of ELISA using purified antigen in hydatidosis

Y Sbihi  1 , A Rmiqui, M N Rodriguez-Cabezas, A Orduña, A Rodriguez-Torres, A Osuna
Affiliations
Comparative Study

Comparative sensitivity of six serological tests and diagnostic value of ELISA using purified antigen in hydatidosis

Y Sbihi et al. J Clin Lab Anal. 2001.

Abstract

Most serodiagnostic techniques have been evaluated for diagnosis of cystic hydatid disease caused by Echinococcus granulosus. Each, to varying degrees, has been shown to give false results, with considerable variation between laboratories. The comparative study was made concerning the sensitivity of the immunodiagnostic methods based on 58 sera from hydatid disease with different cyst locations. Latex agglutination, immunoelectrophoresis (IEP), and specific IgE, IgG enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) tests were studied. Specific IgG ELISA AgB (antigen B-rich fraction) was the most sensitive test (96.5%) and the least sensitive tests were specific IgE ELISA (24.1%) and IEP (25.8%). The low sensitivity of these two tests was due partly to the low reactivity detected in the sera of patients with lung hydatidosis. Initial laboratory studies showed purified antigens to be preferable to crude cyst fluid, regardless of the type of test used. For this reason, we evaluated the sensitivity and specificity of ELISA by using the purified antigen-B-rich fraction. In all, 117 sera were examined: 78 sera from patients with hydatidosis surgically confirmed, 15 sera from healthy control subjects, and 24 sera from patients with diseases other than hydatidosis. The method gave good results: 93.5% sensitivity, 89.7% specificity, and 92.3% diagnostic efficacy.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Varela‐Díaz VM, Guarnera EA, Coltorti EA. 1986. Ventajas y limitaciones de los métodos inmunológicos y de detección por imágenes para el diagnóstico de la hidatidosis. Bol Oficina Sanit Panam 100:369–386. - PubMed
    1. Rickard MD, Lightowlers MW. 1986. In: Thompson RCA, editor. The biology of echinococcus and hydatid disease. London: George Allen and Unwin; p 217–249.
    1. Lightowlers MW, Gottstein B. 1995. In: Thompson RCA, Lymbery AJ, editors. Echinococcus and hydatid disease. Oxon: Cab International; p 376–380.
    1. Zarzosa MP, Orduña A, Gutierrez P, et al. 1999. evaluation of six serological tests in diagnosis and postoperative control of pulmonary hydatid disease patients. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis 35:255–262. - PubMed
    1. Macpherson CNL, Craig PS. 1991. In: Macpherson CNL, Craig PS, editors. Parasitic helminths and zoonoses in Africa. London: Unwin & Hyman; p 25–53.

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources