Comparison of Microscopy, Card Agglutination Test for Trypanosoma Evansi, and Real-time PCR in The Diagnosis of Trypanosomosis in Dromedary Camels of The Abu Dhabi Emirate, UAE

IF 1.5 3区 农林科学 Q2 VETERINARY SCIENCES Onderstepoort Journal of Veterinary Research Pub Date : 2022-02-03 DOI:10.2478/jvetres-2022-0002
S. Habeeba, Rashid A Khan, Hassan Zackaria, Saeed Yammahi, Zulaikha Mohamed, Wissam Sobhi, A. Abdelkader, M. Alhosani, S. A. Muhairi
{"title":"Comparison of Microscopy, Card Agglutination Test for Trypanosoma Evansi, and Real-time PCR in The Diagnosis of Trypanosomosis in Dromedary Camels of The Abu Dhabi Emirate, UAE","authors":"S. Habeeba, Rashid A Khan, Hassan Zackaria, Saeed Yammahi, Zulaikha Mohamed, Wissam Sobhi, A. Abdelkader, M. Alhosani, S. A. Muhairi","doi":"10.2478/jvetres-2022-0002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Introduction Trypanosomosis is an important disease of dromedary camels caused by the pathogenic protozoan Trypanosoma evansi. This study aimed to compare three different tests for its diagnosis in this species: conventional microscopy, the card agglutination test for trypanosomosis/T. evansi (CATT/T. evansi) and real-time PCR. Material and Methods Whole blood and serum samples collected from 77 dromedary camels of Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates, were analysed with the test methods stated. Statistical analysis was done using McNemar’s chi-squared test, and Cohen’s kappa index (κ) was calculated. Results We obtained results with positivity of 18% (14/77) by microscopy, 22% by CATT (17/77) and 60% (46/77) by real-time PCR, with the chain reaction detecting at a respectively three- and two-fold greater rate than the other techniques. Analysis of the data revealed a relative sensitivity of 30.4% and 37.0% for microscopy and CATT, respectively, compared to real-time PCR. The difference between the real-time PCR’s sensitivity and those of the other methods was statistically significant, with X2 values of 30.03 and 20.1, respectively (df = 1 and P = 0.05 in both cases). Agreement of microscopy results with those of with CATT was good (κ = 0.72; 95% CI = 0.62–0.82). Cohen’s kappa index showed fair agreement of real-time PCR with microscopy (κ = 0.26; 95% CI = 0.16–0.36) whereas it was in poor agreement with CATT (κ = 0.09; 95% CI = 0.02–0.15). Conclusion Real-time PCR was found to be more sensitive than microscopy and CATT.","PeriodicalId":54685,"journal":{"name":"Onderstepoort Journal of Veterinary Research","volume":"37 1","pages":"125 - 129"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-02-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Onderstepoort Journal of Veterinary Research","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2478/jvetres-2022-0002","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"VETERINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Abstract Introduction Trypanosomosis is an important disease of dromedary camels caused by the pathogenic protozoan Trypanosoma evansi. This study aimed to compare three different tests for its diagnosis in this species: conventional microscopy, the card agglutination test for trypanosomosis/T. evansi (CATT/T. evansi) and real-time PCR. Material and Methods Whole blood and serum samples collected from 77 dromedary camels of Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates, were analysed with the test methods stated. Statistical analysis was done using McNemar’s chi-squared test, and Cohen’s kappa index (κ) was calculated. Results We obtained results with positivity of 18% (14/77) by microscopy, 22% by CATT (17/77) and 60% (46/77) by real-time PCR, with the chain reaction detecting at a respectively three- and two-fold greater rate than the other techniques. Analysis of the data revealed a relative sensitivity of 30.4% and 37.0% for microscopy and CATT, respectively, compared to real-time PCR. The difference between the real-time PCR’s sensitivity and those of the other methods was statistically significant, with X2 values of 30.03 and 20.1, respectively (df = 1 and P = 0.05 in both cases). Agreement of microscopy results with those of with CATT was good (κ = 0.72; 95% CI = 0.62–0.82). Cohen’s kappa index showed fair agreement of real-time PCR with microscopy (κ = 0.26; 95% CI = 0.16–0.36) whereas it was in poor agreement with CATT (κ = 0.09; 95% CI = 0.02–0.15). Conclusion Real-time PCR was found to be more sensitive than microscopy and CATT.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
阿布扎比酋长国单峰骆驼锥虫病的显微镜、卡凝集试验和实时荧光定量PCR诊断比较
摘要简介锥虫病是由致病性原生动物埃氏锥虫引起的单峰骆驼的一种重要疾病。本研究旨在比较三种不同的诊断方法:常规显微镜,卡凝集试验锥虫病/T。evansi土/ T。evansi)和real-time PCR。材料与方法对阿拉伯联合酋长国阿布扎比77头单峰骆驼的全血和血清样本进行检测。统计学分析采用McNemar’s卡方检验,计算Cohen’s kappa指数(κ)。结果镜检阳性率为18% (14/77),CATT阳性率为22% (17/77),real-time PCR阳性率为60%(46/77),链反应检出率分别是其他技术的3倍和2倍。数据分析显示,与实时PCR相比,显微镜和CATT的相对灵敏度分别为30.4%和37.0%。real-time PCR与其他方法的敏感性差异有统计学意义,X2值分别为30.03和20.1 (df = 1, P = 0.05)。镜检结果与CATT吻合良好(κ = 0.72;95% ci = 0.62-0.82)。Cohen’s kappa指数与显微镜下的实时PCR结果一致(κ = 0.26;95% CI = 0.16-0.36),而与CATT的一致性较差(κ = 0.09;95% ci = 0.02-0.15)。结论实时荧光定量PCR检测的灵敏度高于显微镜和CATT检测。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
13
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊介绍: The Onderstepoort Journal of Veterinary Research, is the official publication of the Onderstepoort Veterinary Institute. While it considers submissions from any geographic region, its focus is on Africa and the infectious and parasitic diseases and disease vectors that affect livestock and wildlife on the continent.
期刊最新文献
Antioxidant properties, anti-nutritive and toxic factors of Terminalia sericea in Onderstepoort. Antibiotic resistance and mitigation using One Health lens in aquaculture of Northern Nigeria. Rabies in equids in Sudan. Applied One Health: Nigeria National Veterinary Research Institute COVID-19 pandemic response. Factors associated with the rabies vaccination status of dogs in households in Beni City, D.R. Congo.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1