{"title":"内镜和结肠镜检查患者溶组织内阿米巴、肠贾第虫和隐孢子虫患病率的调查","authors":"Mehmet Tugay Eren, Serpil Değerli, Özlem Yönem","doi":"10.4274/tpd.galenos.2022.30502","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>In this study, it was aimed to investigate the presence of <i>Entamoeba histolytica, Giardia intestinalis</i> and <i>Cryptosporidium</i> spp. in the samples taken during the procedure from patients who underwent endoscopy and/or colonoscopy with different prediagnoses, and in the stools of the same patients, by ELISA and direct microscopy methods.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 88 patients' endoscopic and colonoscopic pre-washed materials, which consisted of 49 individuals who belong former group and 39 individuals to the next group, were, respectively, obtained, and the stool samples were also included to study from the same group. All the specimens were immediately transferred to the parasitology research laboratory within the same day and stored C until for the next step of ELISA applications.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>All the samples were examined by direct microscopy and ELISA method. In the examinations performed using the ELISA method; <i>E. histolytica</i> was detected in 2 (2.3%) stool samples, and <i>G. intestinalis</i> was found in 4 (4.5%) stool samples. In the colonoscopic wash/swab samples of the patients who underwent colonoscopy, 6 (6.8%) <i>G. intestinalis</i>, 1 (1.1%) <i>Cryptosporidium</i> spp. detected. No parasites were detected by ELISA in any of the stool samples or endoscopic washing/swab samples of the patients who underwent colonoscopy. No parasites were detected in stool and wash/swab samples by the direct examination method. When the incidence of <i>G. intestinalis</i> in washing/swab samples taken from patients who underwent endoscopy and colonoscopy was statistically compared, the difference was found to be significant (p<0.05). When the incidence of <i>G. intestinalis</i> in the stools of patients who underwent endoscopy was compared, the difference between genders was found to be significant (p<0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In patients with gastrointestinal complaints and undergoing endoscopy and colonoscopy, investigation of the presence of parasites by stool examination with direct microscopy may be insufficient. In addition to the direct examination of the stool sample, it is thought that the investigation of parasite antigens in the wash/swab materials that can be easily taken during the endoscopy and colonoscopy procedure is necessary and critical in the diagnosis.</p>","PeriodicalId":34974,"journal":{"name":"Turkiye parazitolojii dergisi","volume":" ","pages":"281-287"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Investigation of the Precence of <i>Entamoeba histolytica, Giardia intestinalis</i> and <i>Cryptosporidium</i> spp. in Patients Who Undergone Endoscopy and Colonoscopy\",\"authors\":\"Mehmet Tugay Eren, Serpil Değerli, Özlem Yönem\",\"doi\":\"10.4274/tpd.galenos.2022.30502\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>In this study, it was aimed to investigate the presence of <i>Entamoeba histolytica, Giardia intestinalis</i> and <i>Cryptosporidium</i> spp. in the samples taken during the procedure from patients who underwent endoscopy and/or colonoscopy with different prediagnoses, and in the stools of the same patients, by ELISA and direct microscopy methods.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 88 patients' endoscopic and colonoscopic pre-washed materials, which consisted of 49 individuals who belong former group and 39 individuals to the next group, were, respectively, obtained, and the stool samples were also included to study from the same group. All the specimens were immediately transferred to the parasitology research laboratory within the same day and stored C until for the next step of ELISA applications.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>All the samples were examined by direct microscopy and ELISA method. In the examinations performed using the ELISA method; <i>E. histolytica</i> was detected in 2 (2.3%) stool samples, and <i>G. intestinalis</i> was found in 4 (4.5%) stool samples. In the colonoscopic wash/swab samples of the patients who underwent colonoscopy, 6 (6.8%) <i>G. intestinalis</i>, 1 (1.1%) <i>Cryptosporidium</i> spp. detected. No parasites were detected by ELISA in any of the stool samples or endoscopic washing/swab samples of the patients who underwent colonoscopy. No parasites were detected in stool and wash/swab samples by the direct examination method. When the incidence of <i>G. intestinalis</i> in washing/swab samples taken from patients who underwent endoscopy and colonoscopy was statistically compared, the difference was found to be significant (p<0.05). When the incidence of <i>G. intestinalis</i> in the stools of patients who underwent endoscopy was compared, the difference between genders was found to be significant (p<0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In patients with gastrointestinal complaints and undergoing endoscopy and colonoscopy, investigation of the presence of parasites by stool examination with direct microscopy may be insufficient. In addition to the direct examination of the stool sample, it is thought that the investigation of parasite antigens in the wash/swab materials that can be easily taken during the endoscopy and colonoscopy procedure is necessary and critical in the diagnosis.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":34974,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Turkiye parazitolojii dergisi\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"281-287\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-11-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Turkiye parazitolojii dergisi\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4274/tpd.galenos.2022.30502\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Turkiye parazitolojii dergisi","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4274/tpd.galenos.2022.30502","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
Investigation of the Precence of Entamoeba histolytica, Giardia intestinalis and Cryptosporidium spp. in Patients Who Undergone Endoscopy and Colonoscopy
Objective: In this study, it was aimed to investigate the presence of Entamoeba histolytica, Giardia intestinalis and Cryptosporidium spp. in the samples taken during the procedure from patients who underwent endoscopy and/or colonoscopy with different prediagnoses, and in the stools of the same patients, by ELISA and direct microscopy methods.
Methods: A total of 88 patients' endoscopic and colonoscopic pre-washed materials, which consisted of 49 individuals who belong former group and 39 individuals to the next group, were, respectively, obtained, and the stool samples were also included to study from the same group. All the specimens were immediately transferred to the parasitology research laboratory within the same day and stored C until for the next step of ELISA applications.
Results: All the samples were examined by direct microscopy and ELISA method. In the examinations performed using the ELISA method; E. histolytica was detected in 2 (2.3%) stool samples, and G. intestinalis was found in 4 (4.5%) stool samples. In the colonoscopic wash/swab samples of the patients who underwent colonoscopy, 6 (6.8%) G. intestinalis, 1 (1.1%) Cryptosporidium spp. detected. No parasites were detected by ELISA in any of the stool samples or endoscopic washing/swab samples of the patients who underwent colonoscopy. No parasites were detected in stool and wash/swab samples by the direct examination method. When the incidence of G. intestinalis in washing/swab samples taken from patients who underwent endoscopy and colonoscopy was statistically compared, the difference was found to be significant (p<0.05). When the incidence of G. intestinalis in the stools of patients who underwent endoscopy was compared, the difference between genders was found to be significant (p<0.05).
Conclusion: In patients with gastrointestinal complaints and undergoing endoscopy and colonoscopy, investigation of the presence of parasites by stool examination with direct microscopy may be insufficient. In addition to the direct examination of the stool sample, it is thought that the investigation of parasite antigens in the wash/swab materials that can be easily taken during the endoscopy and colonoscopy procedure is necessary and critical in the diagnosis.