MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.3855/jidc.384

Медицинская библиотека · Journal of infection in developing countries · 2010

Clinical and serological evaluation of Leptospirosis in Puducherry, India.

Shekatkar Smita Benjamin, Harish Belgode Narasimha, Menezes Godfred Antony, Parija Subhash Chandra

Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяПеревод в очереди

Аннотация

BACKGROUND

Leptospirosis is a zoonotic disease with a worldwide distribution. There is a paucity of available data about prevalence of this disease in Pondicherry. Our aim was to investigate the seropositivity rate of leptospirosis in suspected cases and also to identify the predominant serogroups present by performing Microscopic Agglutination Test (MAT). The other aim of this study was to compare the results of a commercially available IgM ELISA with that of MAT.

METHODOLOGY: A total of 110 blood samples from patients suspected of leptospirosis were sent for diagnosis. These samples were subjected to IgM ELISA and the microscopic agglutination test (MAT). MAT was done using a panel of 12 Leptospira serovars.

RESULTS

MAT analysis of the 110 samples showed 40 (36%) to be positive. Antibodies were predominantly seen against serogroup Leptospira Icterohemorrhagiae (27%), followed by Pomona (17%), and Pyrogenes (12%). IgM ELISA done on these samples showed a positivity of 37% compared to MAT.

CONCLUSION

This study reveals that the MAT test can be standardized in a diagnostic laboratory and used in conjunction with an IgM ELISA.

Для цитирования: Shekatkar Smita Benjamin, Harish Belgode Narasimha, Menezes Godfred Antony, Parija Subhash Chandra. Clinical and serological evaluation of Leptospirosis in Puducherry, India.. Journal of infection in developing countries. 2010. DOI: 10.3855/jidc.384.

Предметные рубрики MeSH

Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

История · было → стало

Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.