Commercial Simplex and Multiplex PCR Assays for the Detection of Intestinal Parasites <i>Giardia intestinalis</i>, <i>Entamoeba</i> spp., and <i>Cryptosporidium</i> spp.: Comparative Evaluation of Seven Commercial PCR Kits with Routine In-House Simplex PCR Assays
Nowadays, many commercial kits allowing the detection of digestive parasites by DNA amplification methods have been developed, including simplex PCR assays (SimpPCRa) allowing the identification of a single parasite, and multiplex PCR assays (MultPCRa) allowing the identification of several parasite...
Guardado en:
| Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Formato: | article |
| Lenguaje: | EN |
| Publicado: |
MDPI AG
2021
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | https://doaj.org/article/76b1216619f041b78f0350279372c902 |
| Etiquetas: |
Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
|
| Sumario: | Nowadays, many commercial kits allowing the detection of digestive parasites by DNA amplification methods have been developed, including simplex PCR assays (SimpPCRa) allowing the identification of a single parasite, and multiplex PCR assays (MultPCRa) allowing the identification of several parasites at once. Thus, aimed at improving the diagnosis of intestinal protozoal infections, it is essential to evaluate the performances of these new tools. A total of 174 DNA samples collected between 2007 and 2017 were retrospectively included in this study. Performances of four commercial SimpPCRa (i.e., CerTest-VIASURE<sup>TM</sup>) and three MultPCRa (i.e., CerTest-VIASURE<sup>TM</sup>, FAST-TRACK-Diagnostics-FTD-Stool-Parasite<sup>TM</sup> and DIAGENODE-Gastroenteritis/Parasite-panel-I<sup>TM</sup>) were evaluated for the detection of <i>Cryptosporidium</i> spp., <i>Entamoeba</i> spp., and <i>Giardia intestinalis</i> in stool samples compared to our routinely used in-house SimpPCRa. Globally, the SimpPCRa showed better sensitivity/specificity for the detection of <i>G. intestinalis</i>, <i>E. histolytica</i>, <i>E. dispar,</i> and <i>Cryptosporidium</i> spp. (i.e., 96.9/93.6%; 100/100%; 95.5/100%; and 100/99.3%, respectively), compared to the three commercial MultPCRa tested. All in all, we showed that MultPCRa offer an interesting alternative for the detection of protozoans in stool samples depending on the clinical context. |
|---|