Differences in the detection of Cryptosporidium and Isospora (Cystoisospora) oocysts according to the fecal concentration or staining method used in a clinical laboratory

dc.creatorPacheco, Flávia Thamiris Figueiredo
dc.creatorSilva, Renata K N R
dc.creatorMartins, Adson Santos
dc.creatorOliveira, Ricardo Riccio
dc.creatorNeves, Neuza Maria Alcântara
dc.creatorSilva, Moacir Paranhos
dc.creatorSoares, Neci Matos
dc.creatorTeixeira, Márcia Cristina Aquino
dc.date2017-05-26T17:46:41Z
dc.date2017-05-26T17:46:41Z
dc.date2013
dc.date.accessioned2023-09-26T20:18:37Z
dc.date.available2023-09-26T20:18:37Z
dc.identifierPACHECO, F. T. F. et al. Differences in the detection of Cryptosporidium and Isospora (Cystoisospora) oocysts according to the fecal concentration or staining method used in a clinical laboratory. Journal of Parasitologists, v. 99, n. 6, p. 1002–1008, 2013.
dc.identifier0022-3395
dc.identifierhttps://www.arca.fiocruz.br/handle/icict/19026
dc.identifier10.1645/12-33.1
dc.identifier.urihttps://repositorioslatinoamericanos.uchile.cl/handle/2250/8853902
dc.descriptionOliveira, Ricardo Riccio “Documento produzido em parceria ou por autor vinculado à Fiocruz, mas não consta à informação no documento”.
dc.descriptionFundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado da Bahia (FAPESB), Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq/MCT), and Universidade Federal da Bahia (UFBA), Brazil.
dc.descriptionDespite the availability of many parasitological methods for detection of Cryptosporidium and Isospora (Cystoisospora) belli in fecal samples, there are uncertainties about the accuracy of these techniques in laboratory practice. In this study, 27 formalin-fixed positive stool samples for Cryptosporidium and 15 for I. belli were analyzed by 2 concentration methods, sedimentation by centrifugation (SC) and formalin-ethyl acetate (FE), and by 3 tintorial techniques, modified Ziehl-Neelsen (ZN), safranin (SF), and auramine (AR). No significant differences were observed on Cryptosporidium identification between concentration methods, while a significantly higher number of I. belli oocysts (P < 0.0001) was detected in fecal smears concentrated by the SC than by the FE method. Fecal samples processed by FE produced a median oocyst loss to the fatty ring of 34.8% for Cryptosporidium and 45.4% for I. belli. However, FE concentration provided 63% of Cryptosporidium and 100% of I. belli slides classified as superior for microscopic examination. Regarding the efficiency of staining methods, a more significant detection of Cryptosporidium oocysts was observed in fecal smears stained by ZN (P < 0.01) or AR (P < 0.05) than by the SF method. Regular to high-quality slides for microscopic examination were mostly observed in fecal smears stained with AR or ZN for Cryptosporidium and with SF or ZN for I. belli. This study suggests a great variability in oocyst power detection by routine parasitological methods, and that the most frequent intestinal coccidians in humans have specific requirements for concentration and staining.
dc.formatapplication/pdf
dc.languageeng
dc.publisherAmerican Society of Parasitologists
dc.rightsopen access
dc.subjectCryptosporidium
dc.subjectIsospora
dc.subjectDiarréia
dc.subjectColiformes fecais
dc.subjectLaboratório clinico
dc.subjectCryptosporidium
dc.subjectIsospora
dc.subjectDiarrhea
dc.subjectFecal coliforms
dc.subjectClinical laboratory
dc.subjectCryptosporidium
dc.subjectIsospora
dc.subjectDiarréia
dc.titleDifferences in the detection of Cryptosporidium and Isospora (Cystoisospora) oocysts according to the fecal concentration or staining method used in a clinical laboratory
dc.typeArticle


Este ítem pertenece a la siguiente institución