Laboratory Diagnosis of Amoebic Keratitis: Comparison of Four Diagnostic Methods for Different Types of Clinical Specimens

Author:

Boggild Andrea K.1,Martin Donald S.2,Lee Theresa YuLing2,Yu Billy2,Low Donald E.234

Affiliation:

1. Tropical Diseases Unit, Toronto General Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada M5G 2C4

2. Parasitology Laboratory, Ontario Agency for Health Protection and Promotion, Etobicoke, Ontario, Canada M9P 3T1

3. Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada

4. Department of Microbiology, Mount Sinai Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada M5G 1X5

Abstract

ABSTRACT Amoebic keratitis causes significant ocular morbidity in contact lens wearers. Current diagnostic methods for amoebic keratitis are insensitive and labor-intensive and have poor turnaround time. We evaluated four laboratory methods for detection of acanthamoebae in clinical specimens. Deidentified, delinked consecutive specimens from patients with suspected amoebic keratitis were assayed for acanthamoebae by direct smear analysis, culture, and PCR using two different primer sets specific for Acanthamoeba ribosomal DNA. The consensus reference standard was considered fulfilled when the results for any two of the four tests were positive, and the outcome measures were sensitivity and specificity. Of 107 specimens assayed over an 18-month period, 20 were positive for acanthamoebae. The sensitivity and specificity of each assay were as follows, respectively: for smear analysis, 55% (95% confidence interval [CI], 33.2 to 76.8%) and 100%; for culture, 73.7% (95% CI, 54.4 to 93.0%) and 100%; for PCR using Nelson primers, 90% (95% CI, 76.9 to 100%) and 90.8% (95% CI, 84.7 to 96.9%); and for PCR using JDP primers, 65% (95% CI, 44.1 to 85.9%) and 100%. Nelson primer PCR demonstrated a single-organism level of analytic sensitivity. The performance characteristics of the assays varied by specimen type, with contact lenses and casings showing the highest rates of detectable acanthamoebae and the highest diagnostic sensitivities for direct smear analysis, culture, and JDP primer PCR, though these results are based on small numbers and should be interpreted cautiously. These findings have important implications for clinicians collecting diagnostic specimens and for diagnostic laboratories, especially in outbreak situations.

Publisher

American Society for Microbiology

Subject

Microbiology (medical)

Reference21 articles.

1. Banoo, S., D. Bell, P. Bossuyt, A. Herring, D. Mabey, F. Poole, P. G. Smith, N. Sriram, C. Wongsrichanalai, R. Linke, R. O'Brien, M. Perkins, J. Cunningham, P. Matsoso, C. M. Nathanson, P. Olliaro, R. W. Peeling, A. Ramsay, et al. 2007. Evaluation of diagnostic tests for infectious diseases: general principles. Nat. Rev. Microbiol.5(Suppl. 11):S17-S29.

2. Bryant, K., J. Bugante, T. Chang, S. Chen, J. Rosenberg, R. Hammond, K. McConnell, R. Sanderson, J. Elm, M. Nakata, C. Wakida, C. Austin, J. Bestudik, M. G. Bordson, C. Conover, L. Granzow, A. Pelletier, V. Rea, A. Chu, E. Luckman, K. Signs, J. Harper, T. Damrow, E. Mosher, K. Kruger, E. Saheli, M. Cassidy, J. Hatch, A. Weltman, E. J. Garcia Rivera, Y. Garcia, M. A. Kainer, J. Archer, C. Joslin, P. Cernoch, D. Jones, M. Hamill, A. Matoba, S. Pflugfelder, K. Wilhelmus, S. Beavers, T. Chen, K. Christian, M. Cooper, D. Dufficy, M. Gershman, M. Glenshaw, A. Hall, S. Holzbauer, A. Huang, A. Langer, Z. Moore, A. S. Patel, L. R. Carpenter, J. Schaffzin, J. Su, I. Trevino, T. Weiser, P. Wiersma, S. Lorick, and J. R. Verani. 2007. Acanthamoeba keratitis multiple states, 2005-2007. MMWR Morb. Mortal. Wkly. Rep.56:532-534.

3. Clarke, D. W., and J. Y. Niederkorn. 2006. The pathophysiology of Acanthamoeba keratitis. Trends Parasitol.22:175-180.

4. Gupta, N., and R. Tandon. 2008. Investigative modalities in infectious keratitis. Indian J. Ophthalmol.56:209-213.

5. Hammersmith, K. M. 2006. Diagnosis and management of Acanthamoeba keratitis. Curr. Opin. Ophthalmol.17:327-331.

Cited by 56 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3