Journals / Mikrobiyoloji Bülteni / 2007 / Cilt: 41 - Sayı: 4

Evaluation of diagnostic value of brucellacapt test in brucellosis

Brusellozun tanısında brucellacapt testinin değerinin araştırılması

Pages
591–595
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Although our data have pointed out the high performance of Brucellacapt test in brusellosis serodiagnosis, confirmation with further data carried on extensive and comprehensive study groups, are needed.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Although standard tube agglutination (STA) test is the most preferred method for the serodiagnosis of brucellosis, it may yield false negative results because of its incompetence in detecting the blocking (non-agglutinating) antibodies.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Blocking antibodies can be detected by Coombs’ test (anti-human globulin test), which is generally not performed in laboratories routinely since it is a time consuming and laborious method.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Although our data have pointed out the high performance of Brucellacapt test in brusellosis serodiagnosis, confirmation with further data carried on extensive and comprehensive study groups, are needed.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Although standard tube agglutination (STA) test is the most preferred method for the serodiagnosis of brucellosis, it may yield false negative results because of its incompetence in detecting the blocking (non-agglutinating) antibodies. Blocking antibodies can be detected by Coombs’ test (anti-human globulin test), which is generally not performed in laboratories routinely since it is a time consuming and laborious method. Recently more practical Brucellacapt (immunocapture-agglutination) test is being used for the detection of total antibodies without any interference of the presence of blocking ones. The aim of this study was the evaluation of the value of Brucellacapt test in the serodiagnosis of brucellosis. Twenty-five brusellosis patients whose blood cultures yielded Brucella melitensis growth, and 31 healthy subjects as controls, were included to the study. Serum samples obtained from all of the 56 subjects have been searched by STA, Coombs’ and Brucellacapt methods, and threshold titre was accepted as 1/160. As a result, 40% (10/25) of culture positive patients were found positive (≥1/160) by STA, whereas 92% (23/25) were positive (≥1/160) by both Coombs’ and Brucellacapt tests. No positivity was detected in the control group by any one of those three tests. The agreement between Coombs and Brucellacapt methods was found as 100%, while the sensitivity and specificity of Brucellacapt test were estimated as 92% (23/25) and 100% (31/31), respectively, when the culture was accepted as reference method. Although our data have pointed out the high performance of Brucellacapt test in brusellosis serodiagnosis, confirmation with further data carried on extensive and comprehensive study groups, are needed.

Özet

Brusellozun serolojik tanısında sıklıkla tercih edilen yöntem olan standart tüp aglütinasyon (STA) testi, blokan antikor varlığını tespit edemediğinden yalancı negatif sonuçların raporlanmasına yol açabilmektedir. Blokan antikorların saptanması ise ancak, zaman alıcı ve zahmetli olması nedeniyle birçok laboratuvarda rutin olarak uygulanmayan Coombs testi (anti-human globulin test) ile mümkün olmaktadır. Son yıllarda kullanıma giren ve oldukça pratik olan Brucellacapt testi (immunocapture agglutination), blokan antikor varlığından etkilenmeksizin brusellozda oluşan tüm antikorları tespit edebilmektedir. Bu çalışmada Brucellacapt testinin brusellozun serolojik tanısındaki değerinin araştırılması amaçlanmıştır. Çalışmaya, kan kültürlerinden Brucella melitensis izolasyonu yapılan 25 brusellozlu hasta ile 31 sağlıklı kontrol olmak üzere toplam 56 birey dahil edilmiştir. Tüm bireylerden alınan serum örnekleri, STA, Coombs ve Brucellacapt testleri ile çalışılmış ve sınır titre değeri 1/160 olarak alınmıştır. Sonuç olarak kültür pozitif hastaların %40’ında (10/25) STA, %92’sinde (23/25) ise hem Coombs hem de Brucellacapt testleri pozitif (≥1/160) bulunmuştur. Kontrol grubunun hiçbirisinde bu testlerden herhangi birisi ile pozitiflik saptanmamıştır. Coombs ve Brucellacapt test sonuçlarının %100 uyum gösterdiği belirlenmiş ve kültür yöntemi referans alındığında Brucellacapt testinin duyarlılığı %92 (23/25), özgüllüğü ise %100 (31/31) olarak hesaplanmıştır. Bulgularımız Brucellacapt testinin bruselloz tanısında Coombs testi ile aynı yüksek performansa sahip olduğunu göstermekle birlikte, bu verilerin daha geniş ve kapsamlı çalışma gruplarıyla alınacak sonuçlarla desteklenmesi gerektiği düşünülmüştür.

🔖

Cite This Article

ALIŞKAN, H. E., ÇOLAKOĞLU, Ş., TURUNÇ, T., DEMİROĞLU, Y. Z., GÜVERCİN, A. C. Y., ARSLAN, A. H. (2007). Evaluation of diagnostic value of brucellacapt test in brucellosis. Mikrobiyoloji Bülteni, Cilt: 41 - Sayı: 4, 591–595. https://ajindex.com/articles/299375

References (13)

  1. Young EJ. Brucella species, pp: 86-92. In: Mandell GL, Bennett JE, Dolin R (eds), Principles and Practice of Infectious Diseases. 2000, 5th ed. Churchill Livingstone, New York
  2. Shapiro DS, Wong JD. Brucella, pp: 625-31. In: Murray PR, Baron EJ, Pfaller MA, Tenover FC, Yolken RH (eds), Manual of Clinical Microbiology. 1999, 7th ed. ASM Pres, Washington, DC
  3. İseri S, Bulut C, Yetkin MA, Kınıklı S, Demiröz AP, Tülek N. Comparison of the diagnostic value of blood and bone marrow cultures in brucellosis. Mikrobiyol Bul 2006; 40: 201-6
  4. Yagupsky P. Detection of Brucellae in blood cultures. J Clin Microbiol 1999; 37: 3437-42
  5. Orduna A, Almaraz A, Prado A, et al. Evaluation of an immunocapture-agglutination test (Brucellacapt) for serodiagnosis of human brucellosis. J Clin Microbiol 2000; 38: 4000-5
  6. Casao MA, Navarro E, Solera J. Evaluation of Brucellacapt for the diagnosis of human brucellosis. J Infect 2004; 49:102-8
  7. Serra J, Velasco J, Godoy P, Mendoza J. Can the Brucellacapt test be substituted for the Coombs’ test in the diagnosis of human brucellosis? Enferm Infecc Microbiol Clin 2001; 19:202-5
  8. Gomez MC, Rosa C, Geijo P, Escribano MA. Comparative study of the Brucellacapt test versus the Coombs’ test for Brucella. Enferm Infecc Microbiol Clin 1999; 17: 283-5
  9. Mert A, Özaras R, Tabak F, et al. The sensitivity and specifity of Brucella agglutination tests. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis 2003; 46: 241-3
  10. Yıldız F, Tanyel E, Hatipoglu CA, Ertem GT, Tülek N, Oral B. Evaluation of Brucella tube agglutination test in patients with brucellosis patients with bacterial infections other than brucellosis and healthy subjects. Mikrobiyol Bul 2005; 39: 211-7
  11. Pappas G, Akritidis N, Bosilkovski M, Tsianos E. Brucellosis.N Engl J Med 2005; 352: 2325-36
  12. Colak H, Usluer G, Ozgunes I, Karaguven B, Barlas S. Comparison of the Wright, indirect Coombs’ and enzyme immunoassay IgG methods for the diagnosis of chronic brucellosis. Mikrobiyol Bul 1992; 26: 56-60
  13. Ardic N, Ozyurt M, Sezer O, Erdemoglu A, Haznedaroglu T. Comparison of Coombs’ and immunocapture-agglutination tests in the diagnosis of brucellosis. Chin Med J (Engl) 2005; 18: 252-4.