EN | TR
E-ISSN: 2146-3077
Retrospective Determination of the Prevelense of Anti-<i>Echinococcus granulosus</i> Antibodies in Cystic Echinococcosis Pre-diagnosed Patients at Erciyes University Faculty of Medicine
PDF
Cite
Share
Request
Original Investigation
VOLUME: 46 ISSUE: 2
P: 133-139
June 2022

Retrospective Determination of the Prevelense of Anti-Echinococcus granulosus Antibodies in Cystic Echinococcosis Pre-diagnosed Patients at Erciyes University Faculty of Medicine

Turkiye Parazitol Derg 2022;46(2):133-139
DOI: 10.4274/tpd.galenos.2022.32032
Merve Yürük
Ozan Yaman
Eda Sivcan
Emrah Erdoğan
1. Erciyes Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi, Parazitoloji Anabilim Dalı, Kayseri, Türkiye
No information available.
No information available
Received Date: 20.08.2021
Accepted Date: 17.02.2022
Publish Date: 23.05.2022
PDF
Cite
Share
Request

ABSTRACT

Objective:

Cystic echinococcosis (CE) is a parasitic disease that has been known for years in helminth diseases and it is important as human and animal health problem in many parts of the world and in our country due to economic losses. In this study, it was aimed to retrospectively evaluate the distribution of anti-E. granulosus-IgG antibodies in patients with pre-diagnosis of CE that referred to parasitology laboratory between January 2013-December 2018.

Methods:

Commercial kit was used for indirect hemaglutination (IHA), indirect fluorescent antibody test (IFAT) and Western blot (WB) methods using sera from patient samples was applied according to the kit proposal. In addition, patient materials for CAM, CSF and blood for which polymerase chain reaction (PCR)/QPCR tests were requested were examined.

Results:

Sera of the patients who were tested with at least one of the IHA, IFAT and WB methods or a combination of these methods, and 443 cases out of 2.283 cases were found to be E. granulosus seropositive. It was determined that 369 (62.03%) of 443 positive patients were female and 330 (37.97%) were male patients. Among these patients, 87 patients whose IFAT and/or IHA tests were negative were found to have positive results with the WB method. IFAT or IHA test results of 13 patients with negative WB tests were found to be positive. Four patients were identified with both tests positive but WB test results negative. In addition, 36 of 72 patients who underwent PCR/QPCR tests were found to be positive.

Conclusion:

As a result of a six-year retrospective screening, 22% of the cases were found to be positive, and it was concluded that the prevalence of CE is high and the use of a single test may be insufficient in the diagnosis of CE, therefore, test combinations will increase the sensitivity and reliability in reaching the correct diagnosis.

Keywords:
Cystic echinococcosis, IHA, IFAT, WB, PCR, QPCR

References

1
Boubaker G, Gottstein B, Hemphill A, Babba H, Spiliotis M. Echinococcus p29 antigen: molecular characterization and implication on post-surgery follow-up of ce patients infected with different species of the Echinococcus granulosus complex. PLoS One 2014; 9: e98357.
2
Gottstein B, Wang J, Blagosklonov O, Grenouillet F, Millon L, Vuitton DA, et al. Echinococcus metacestode: in search of viability markers. Parasite 2014; 21: 63.
3
Düzlü O, Yıldırım A, Sarıözkan S, İnci A. Kayseri yöresinde üc farklı mezbahada kesilen koyun ve sığırlarda kistik Echinococcosis’in ekonomik önemi. Erciyes Üniv Vet Fak Derg 2010; 7: 7-11.
4
Craig P, Mastin A, van Kesteren F, Boufana B. Echinococcus granulosus: Epidemiology and state-of-the-art ofdiagnostics in animals. Vet Parasitol 2015; 213: 132-48.
5
Díaz A. Immunology of cystic echinococcosis (hydatid disease). Br Med Bull 2017; 124: 121-33.
6
Díaz A, Fernández C, Pittini A, Seoane PI, Allen JE, Casaravilla C. The laminated layer: Recent advances and insights into Echinococcus biology and evolution. Exp Parasitol 2015; 158: 23-30.
7
Reiterová K, Auer H, Altintas N, Yolasigmaz A. Evaluation of purified antigen fraction in the immunodiagnosis of cystic echinococcosis. Parasitol Res 2014; 113: 2861-7.
8
Eşgin M, Aktaş M, Coşkun Ş. İndirekt Hemaglütinasyon Testi (IHA) Yöntemi ile Kistik Ekinokkokoz Şüpheli Hastaların Serumlarında Antikor Varlığının Araştırılması. Türkiye Parazitol Derg 2007; 31: 283-7.
9
Yazar S, Taylan Özkan A, Hökelek M, Polat E, Yılmaz H, Özbilge H, et al. Türkiye’de 2001-2005 Yılları Arasında Kistik Ekinokokkozis. Türkiye Parazitol Derg 2008; 32: 208-20.
10
Ertabaklar H, Yıldız İ, Malatyalı E, Tileklioğlu E, Çalışkan SÖ, Ertuğ S. Aydın Adnan Menderes Üniversitesi Eğitim ve Araştırma Hastanesi Parazitoloji Laboratuvarı’na 2005-2017 Yılları Arasında Kistik Ekinokokkozis Şüphesiyle Başvuran Olguların Retrospektif Olarak Değerlendirilmesi. Turkiye Parazitol Derg 2019; 43: 118-22.
11
Yılmaz A, Karameşe M, Akkaş Ö, Uslu H. Kist Hidatik Şüpheli Hastaların Tanısında ELISA ve İmmunokromotografik Yöntemin Karşılaştırılması. Muğla Sıtkı Koçman Üniversitesi Tıp Dergisi 2016; 3: 13-6.
12
Taş Cengiz Z, Yılmaz H, Beyhan YE, Kotan MC, Cobanoğlu U, Ekici A, et al. Yüzüncü Yıl Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Parazitoloji Laboratuvarına 2005-2013 Yılları Arasında Gönderilen Kan Örneklerinde Kistik Ekinokokkozis Seropozitifliği: Retrospektif Değerlendirme. Turkiye Parazitol Derg 2015; 39: 209-11.
13
Yazar S. Kayseri’de Kistik Ekinokokkozisin Son Altı Yıldaki Durumu. Türkiye Parazitol Derg 2005; 29: 241-3.
14
Şişmanlar Eyüboğlu T, Ramaslı Gürsoy T, Tana Aslan A, Pekcan S, Budakoğlu Iİ. Ten-year follow-up of children with hydatid cysts. Turk Pediatri Ars 2019; 54: 173-8.
15
Güreser AS, Özcan O, Özünel L, Boyacıoğlu Zİ, Özkan AT. Çorum’da Kistik Ekinokokkoz Ön Tanısı ile Başvuran Hastaların Radyolojik, Biyokimyasal ve Serolojik Analizlerinin Değerlendirilmesi*. Mikrobiyol Bul 2015; 49: 231-9.
16
Beyhan YE, Babür C, Mungan M, Özkan AT. Türkiye Halk Sağlığı Kurumu Ulusal Parazitoloji Referans Laboratuvarı’na 2009-2013 Yılları Arasında Başvuran Kistik Ekinokokkozis Şüpheli Hastaların Değerlendirilmesi. Turkiye Parazitol Derg 2015; 39: 17-21.