Cargando…

Comparison of Three Methods for Diagnosis of Cutaneous Leishmaniasis

BACKGROUND: Leishmaniasis is one of the infectious parasitic diseases of highest incidence in the world. Cutaneous Leishmaniasis (CL) has long been reported in Shiraz, Southern Iran. There is a need to find a sensitive and specific method for treatment and control of the disease. METHODS: We have co...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Pourmohammadi, B, Motazedian, MH, Hatam, GR, Kalantari, M, Habibi, P, Sarkari, B
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Tehran University of Medical Sciences 2010
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3279850/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22347259
_version_ 1782223750398214144
author Pourmohammadi, B
Motazedian, MH
Hatam, GR
Kalantari, M
Habibi, P
Sarkari, B
author_facet Pourmohammadi, B
Motazedian, MH
Hatam, GR
Kalantari, M
Habibi, P
Sarkari, B
author_sort Pourmohammadi, B
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Leishmaniasis is one of the infectious parasitic diseases of highest incidence in the world. Cutaneous Leishmaniasis (CL) has long been reported in Shiraz, Southern Iran. There is a need to find a sensitive and specific method for treatment and control of the disease. METHODS: We have compared the sensitivity of the conventional methods microscopy and cultivation of lesion scrapes against PCR amplification of parasite kinetoplast DNA from these samples. The samples (n=219) were obtained from the patients clinically suspected of CL. The smears were stained with Giemsa for microscopy and cultured in Novy-Nicolle-McNeal (NNN) blood agar for promastigote growth. For PCR, the dry smears were scraped off the slides and DNA was extracted. RESULTS: The positive rates from 219 specimens were 76.71%, 50.68%, and 93.61% for microscopy, cultivation, and PCR, respectively. The highest correlation was found between PCR and microscopy method (P=0.014). In PCR assay, 95.61%, 3.9%, and 0.49% of the samples were identified as Leishmania major, L. tropica, and dermatropic L. infantum, respectively. CONCLUSION: The PCR method appears to be the most sensitive for the diagnosis of CL and is valuable for identifying the other species of Leishmania with confusing dermatropic signs.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3279850
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2010
publisher Tehran University of Medical Sciences
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-32798502012-02-16 Comparison of Three Methods for Diagnosis of Cutaneous Leishmaniasis Pourmohammadi, B Motazedian, MH Hatam, GR Kalantari, M Habibi, P Sarkari, B Iran J Parasitol Original Article BACKGROUND: Leishmaniasis is one of the infectious parasitic diseases of highest incidence in the world. Cutaneous Leishmaniasis (CL) has long been reported in Shiraz, Southern Iran. There is a need to find a sensitive and specific method for treatment and control of the disease. METHODS: We have compared the sensitivity of the conventional methods microscopy and cultivation of lesion scrapes against PCR amplification of parasite kinetoplast DNA from these samples. The samples (n=219) were obtained from the patients clinically suspected of CL. The smears were stained with Giemsa for microscopy and cultured in Novy-Nicolle-McNeal (NNN) blood agar for promastigote growth. For PCR, the dry smears were scraped off the slides and DNA was extracted. RESULTS: The positive rates from 219 specimens were 76.71%, 50.68%, and 93.61% for microscopy, cultivation, and PCR, respectively. The highest correlation was found between PCR and microscopy method (P=0.014). In PCR assay, 95.61%, 3.9%, and 0.49% of the samples were identified as Leishmania major, L. tropica, and dermatropic L. infantum, respectively. CONCLUSION: The PCR method appears to be the most sensitive for the diagnosis of CL and is valuable for identifying the other species of Leishmania with confusing dermatropic signs. Tehran University of Medical Sciences 2010-12 /pmc/articles/PMC3279850/ /pubmed/22347259 Text en © 2010 Iranian Society of Parasitology & Tehran University of Medical Sciences http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Unported License which allows users to read, copy, distribute and make derivative works for non-commercial purposes from the material, as long as the author of the original work is cited properly.
spellingShingle Original Article
Pourmohammadi, B
Motazedian, MH
Hatam, GR
Kalantari, M
Habibi, P
Sarkari, B
Comparison of Three Methods for Diagnosis of Cutaneous Leishmaniasis
title Comparison of Three Methods for Diagnosis of Cutaneous Leishmaniasis
title_full Comparison of Three Methods for Diagnosis of Cutaneous Leishmaniasis
title_fullStr Comparison of Three Methods for Diagnosis of Cutaneous Leishmaniasis
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of Three Methods for Diagnosis of Cutaneous Leishmaniasis
title_short Comparison of Three Methods for Diagnosis of Cutaneous Leishmaniasis
title_sort comparison of three methods for diagnosis of cutaneous leishmaniasis
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3279850/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22347259
work_keys_str_mv AT pourmohammadib comparisonofthreemethodsfordiagnosisofcutaneousleishmaniasis
AT motazedianmh comparisonofthreemethodsfordiagnosisofcutaneousleishmaniasis
AT hatamgr comparisonofthreemethodsfordiagnosisofcutaneousleishmaniasis
AT kalantarim comparisonofthreemethodsfordiagnosisofcutaneousleishmaniasis
AT habibip comparisonofthreemethodsfordiagnosisofcutaneousleishmaniasis
AT sarkarib comparisonofthreemethodsfordiagnosisofcutaneousleishmaniasis