Evaluation of PCR, culture and serology for the diagnosis of acute human brucellosis

The diagnosis of brucellosis is frequently difficult to establish. This is not only because clinically, the disease can mimic any infectious and noninfectious disease, but also because the established diagnostic methods are not always successful. In this study, we have tried to evaluate PCR techniqu...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Annals of Saudi medicine 2000-05, Vol.20 (3-4), p.224-228
Hauptverfasser: Al-Attas, R A, Al-Khalifa, M, Al-Qurashi, A R, Badawy, M, Al-Gualy, N
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 228
container_issue 3-4
container_start_page 224
container_title Annals of Saudi medicine
container_volume 20
creator Al-Attas, R A
Al-Khalifa, M
Al-Qurashi, A R
Badawy, M
Al-Gualy, N
description The diagnosis of brucellosis is frequently difficult to establish. This is not only because clinically, the disease can mimic any infectious and noninfectious disease, but also because the established diagnostic methods are not always successful. In this study, we have tried to evaluate PCR techniques in the diagnosis of brucellosis in comparison to conventional techniques. Fifty peripheral blood samples from the following groups were collected: patients with brucellosis (17); patients with febrile illnesses due to factors other than brucella etiology (19); symptomatic occupationally exposed persons (9); and healthy volunteers (5). The last three groups were considered controls. Among the 17 Brucella samples, only 14 were obtained before treatment was begun. The samples were tested by serology, using the standard tube agglutination method (STA), blood culture using Bactec machines, and PCR using primer pair to amplify a 223-bp region within a gene coding for a 31-kD Brucella antigen. Diagnosis of brucellosis was based on compatible clinical picture in addition to positive blood culture and/or positive serology. Of the 17 blood samples from patients with brucellosis, eight were culture positive for Brucella species, and all showed high titer antibrucella antibodies. Only 14 of them were positive by PCR, and these were the samples submitted before initiation of therapy, representing 100% sensitivity. Among the 33 controls, blood culture was negative for Brucella in all of them, while one sample showed high-titer antibrucella antibodies. The latter was from the febrile illnesses group. PCR-based assay was able to detect four bands in the controls, all of which were from the occupationally exposed asymptomatic group. In view of the several advantages of PCR over the conventional methods for the diagnosis of brucellosis, such as speed, safety, high sensitivity and specificity, the technique might be considered for laboratory diagnosis of brucellosis. However, for the evaluation of asymptomatic highly exposed persons, PCR might be considered complementary to the traditional methods and followed up by serology and/or culture.
doi_str_mv 10.5144/0256-4947.2000.224
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_70605423</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>70605423</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c343t-6195ce2a9809b578e8674916f894eadd915fdf0d87de0ba796502d0f27123ede3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpFkF1LwzAUhoMoTqd_wAvJlVd2nuazuZQxP2CgyLwOaZNula6ZSSPs39uyiVfnwHnel8OD0E0OM54z9gCEi4wpJmcEAGaEsBN0AUryjDEhTof9D5igyxi_AAgwSs_RJJeUECHIBVotfkybTN_4Dvsav88_7nGV2j4Fh01ncXTBt369x7UPuN84bBuz7nxs4oibKvUOb9LWdLgMqXJtO56u0Flt2uiuj3OKPp8Wq_lLtnx7fp0_LrOKMtpnIle8csSoAlTJZeEKIZnKRV0o5oy1Kue1rcEW0joojVSCA7FQE5kT6qyjU3R36N0F_51c7PW2ieMTpnM-RS1BAGeEDiA5gFXwMQZX611otibsdQ56dKlHVXpUpUeXenA5hG6P7ancOvsfOcqjvzzrbsQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>70605423</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Evaluation of PCR, culture and serology for the diagnosis of acute human brucellosis</title><source>PubMed Central</source><creator>Al-Attas, R A ; Al-Khalifa, M ; Al-Qurashi, A R ; Badawy, M ; Al-Gualy, N</creator><creatorcontrib>Al-Attas, R A ; Al-Khalifa, M ; Al-Qurashi, A R ; Badawy, M ; Al-Gualy, N</creatorcontrib><description>The diagnosis of brucellosis is frequently difficult to establish. This is not only because clinically, the disease can mimic any infectious and noninfectious disease, but also because the established diagnostic methods are not always successful. In this study, we have tried to evaluate PCR techniques in the diagnosis of brucellosis in comparison to conventional techniques. Fifty peripheral blood samples from the following groups were collected: patients with brucellosis (17); patients with febrile illnesses due to factors other than brucella etiology (19); symptomatic occupationally exposed persons (9); and healthy volunteers (5). The last three groups were considered controls. Among the 17 Brucella samples, only 14 were obtained before treatment was begun. The samples were tested by serology, using the standard tube agglutination method (STA), blood culture using Bactec machines, and PCR using primer pair to amplify a 223-bp region within a gene coding for a 31-kD Brucella antigen. Diagnosis of brucellosis was based on compatible clinical picture in addition to positive blood culture and/or positive serology. Of the 17 blood samples from patients with brucellosis, eight were culture positive for Brucella species, and all showed high titer antibrucella antibodies. Only 14 of them were positive by PCR, and these were the samples submitted before initiation of therapy, representing 100% sensitivity. Among the 33 controls, blood culture was negative for Brucella in all of them, while one sample showed high-titer antibrucella antibodies. The latter was from the febrile illnesses group. PCR-based assay was able to detect four bands in the controls, all of which were from the occupationally exposed asymptomatic group. In view of the several advantages of PCR over the conventional methods for the diagnosis of brucellosis, such as speed, safety, high sensitivity and specificity, the technique might be considered for laboratory diagnosis of brucellosis. However, for the evaluation of asymptomatic highly exposed persons, PCR might be considered complementary to the traditional methods and followed up by serology and/or culture.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0256-4947</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 0975-4466</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.5144/0256-4947.2000.224</identifier><identifier>PMID: 17322662</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Saudi Arabia</publisher><ispartof>Annals of Saudi medicine, 2000-05, Vol.20 (3-4), p.224-228</ispartof><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c343t-6195ce2a9809b578e8674916f894eadd915fdf0d87de0ba796502d0f27123ede3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c343t-6195ce2a9809b578e8674916f894eadd915fdf0d87de0ba796502d0f27123ede3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17322662$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Al-Attas, R A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Al-Khalifa, M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Al-Qurashi, A R</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Badawy, M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Al-Gualy, N</creatorcontrib><title>Evaluation of PCR, culture and serology for the diagnosis of acute human brucellosis</title><title>Annals of Saudi medicine</title><addtitle>Ann Saudi Med</addtitle><description>The diagnosis of brucellosis is frequently difficult to establish. This is not only because clinically, the disease can mimic any infectious and noninfectious disease, but also because the established diagnostic methods are not always successful. In this study, we have tried to evaluate PCR techniques in the diagnosis of brucellosis in comparison to conventional techniques. Fifty peripheral blood samples from the following groups were collected: patients with brucellosis (17); patients with febrile illnesses due to factors other than brucella etiology (19); symptomatic occupationally exposed persons (9); and healthy volunteers (5). The last three groups were considered controls. Among the 17 Brucella samples, only 14 were obtained before treatment was begun. The samples were tested by serology, using the standard tube agglutination method (STA), blood culture using Bactec machines, and PCR using primer pair to amplify a 223-bp region within a gene coding for a 31-kD Brucella antigen. Diagnosis of brucellosis was based on compatible clinical picture in addition to positive blood culture and/or positive serology. Of the 17 blood samples from patients with brucellosis, eight were culture positive for Brucella species, and all showed high titer antibrucella antibodies. Only 14 of them were positive by PCR, and these were the samples submitted before initiation of therapy, representing 100% sensitivity. Among the 33 controls, blood culture was negative for Brucella in all of them, while one sample showed high-titer antibrucella antibodies. The latter was from the febrile illnesses group. PCR-based assay was able to detect four bands in the controls, all of which were from the occupationally exposed asymptomatic group. In view of the several advantages of PCR over the conventional methods for the diagnosis of brucellosis, such as speed, safety, high sensitivity and specificity, the technique might be considered for laboratory diagnosis of brucellosis. However, for the evaluation of asymptomatic highly exposed persons, PCR might be considered complementary to the traditional methods and followed up by serology and/or culture.</description><issn>0256-4947</issn><issn>0975-4466</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2000</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNpFkF1LwzAUhoMoTqd_wAvJlVd2nuazuZQxP2CgyLwOaZNula6ZSSPs39uyiVfnwHnel8OD0E0OM54z9gCEi4wpJmcEAGaEsBN0AUryjDEhTof9D5igyxi_AAgwSs_RJJeUECHIBVotfkybTN_4Dvsav88_7nGV2j4Fh01ncXTBt369x7UPuN84bBuz7nxs4oibKvUOb9LWdLgMqXJtO56u0Flt2uiuj3OKPp8Wq_lLtnx7fp0_LrOKMtpnIle8csSoAlTJZeEKIZnKRV0o5oy1Kue1rcEW0joojVSCA7FQE5kT6qyjU3R36N0F_51c7PW2ieMTpnM-RS1BAGeEDiA5gFXwMQZX611otibsdQ56dKlHVXpUpUeXenA5hG6P7ancOvsfOcqjvzzrbsQ</recordid><startdate>20000501</startdate><enddate>20000501</enddate><creator>Al-Attas, R A</creator><creator>Al-Khalifa, M</creator><creator>Al-Qurashi, A R</creator><creator>Badawy, M</creator><creator>Al-Gualy, N</creator><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20000501</creationdate><title>Evaluation of PCR, culture and serology for the diagnosis of acute human brucellosis</title><author>Al-Attas, R A ; Al-Khalifa, M ; Al-Qurashi, A R ; Badawy, M ; Al-Gualy, N</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c343t-6195ce2a9809b578e8674916f894eadd915fdf0d87de0ba796502d0f27123ede3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2000</creationdate><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Al-Attas, R A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Al-Khalifa, M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Al-Qurashi, A R</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Badawy, M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Al-Gualy, N</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Annals of Saudi medicine</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Al-Attas, R A</au><au>Al-Khalifa, M</au><au>Al-Qurashi, A R</au><au>Badawy, M</au><au>Al-Gualy, N</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Evaluation of PCR, culture and serology for the diagnosis of acute human brucellosis</atitle><jtitle>Annals of Saudi medicine</jtitle><addtitle>Ann Saudi Med</addtitle><date>2000-05-01</date><risdate>2000</risdate><volume>20</volume><issue>3-4</issue><spage>224</spage><epage>228</epage><pages>224-228</pages><issn>0256-4947</issn><eissn>0975-4466</eissn><abstract>The diagnosis of brucellosis is frequently difficult to establish. This is not only because clinically, the disease can mimic any infectious and noninfectious disease, but also because the established diagnostic methods are not always successful. In this study, we have tried to evaluate PCR techniques in the diagnosis of brucellosis in comparison to conventional techniques. Fifty peripheral blood samples from the following groups were collected: patients with brucellosis (17); patients with febrile illnesses due to factors other than brucella etiology (19); symptomatic occupationally exposed persons (9); and healthy volunteers (5). The last three groups were considered controls. Among the 17 Brucella samples, only 14 were obtained before treatment was begun. The samples were tested by serology, using the standard tube agglutination method (STA), blood culture using Bactec machines, and PCR using primer pair to amplify a 223-bp region within a gene coding for a 31-kD Brucella antigen. Diagnosis of brucellosis was based on compatible clinical picture in addition to positive blood culture and/or positive serology. Of the 17 blood samples from patients with brucellosis, eight were culture positive for Brucella species, and all showed high titer antibrucella antibodies. Only 14 of them were positive by PCR, and these were the samples submitted before initiation of therapy, representing 100% sensitivity. Among the 33 controls, blood culture was negative for Brucella in all of them, while one sample showed high-titer antibrucella antibodies. The latter was from the febrile illnesses group. PCR-based assay was able to detect four bands in the controls, all of which were from the occupationally exposed asymptomatic group. In view of the several advantages of PCR over the conventional methods for the diagnosis of brucellosis, such as speed, safety, high sensitivity and specificity, the technique might be considered for laboratory diagnosis of brucellosis. However, for the evaluation of asymptomatic highly exposed persons, PCR might be considered complementary to the traditional methods and followed up by serology and/or culture.</abstract><cop>Saudi Arabia</cop><pmid>17322662</pmid><doi>10.5144/0256-4947.2000.224</doi><tpages>5</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0256-4947
ispartof Annals of Saudi medicine, 2000-05, Vol.20 (3-4), p.224-228
issn 0256-4947
0975-4466
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_70605423
source PubMed Central
title Evaluation of PCR, culture and serology for the diagnosis of acute human brucellosis
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-22T13%3A10%3A58IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Evaluation%20of%20PCR,%20culture%20and%20serology%20for%20the%20diagnosis%20of%20acute%20human%20brucellosis&rft.jtitle=Annals%20of%20Saudi%20medicine&rft.au=Al-Attas,%20R%20A&rft.date=2000-05-01&rft.volume=20&rft.issue=3-4&rft.spage=224&rft.epage=228&rft.pages=224-228&rft.issn=0256-4947&rft.eissn=0975-4466&rft_id=info:doi/10.5144/0256-4947.2000.224&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E70605423%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=70605423&rft_id=info:pmid/17322662&rfr_iscdi=true