Journals / Infectious diseases and clinical microbiology (Online) / 2020 / Cilt: 2 - Sayı: 1

Comparison of Coombs Gel Test with ELISAand Standard Tube Agglutination TestsUsed in Serological Diagnosis of Brucellosis

Pages
1–7
Publication Date
2022-10-19
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)

Nevertheless, the sensitivity and specificity of BCGT should be demonstrated by comprehensive studies, including culture-confirmed cases and control groups.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objective: Serological tests are the most commonly used tests in the diagnosis of brucellosis; however, each serological test has some drawbacks.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Materials and Methods: The study included 42 patients who were considered to have brucellosis as a preliminary diagnosis.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Nevertheless, the sensitivity and specificity of BCGT should be demonstrated by comprehensive studies, including culture-confirmed cases and control groups.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Objective: Serological tests are the most commonly used tests in the diagnosis of brucellosis; however, each serological test has some drawbacks. In this study, we aimed to determine the value of the Brucella Coombs gel test (BCGT) in the serological diagnosis of brucellosis in comparison with Standard tube agglutination (STA) and ELISA tests. Materials and Methods: The study included 42 patients who were considered to have brucellosis as a preliminary diagnosis. BCGT, Brucella-IgM/IgG ELISA, and STA tests were performed from serum samples of the patients. The correlation of the diagnostic tests was analyzed using Cohen’s Kappa Analysis. Results: Twenty-seven (64.2%) of 42 patients were diagnosed with brucellosis according to their medical history and clinical and serological tests. The sensitivity and specificity of BCGT to diagnose brucellosis was 96.2%, and 100%, respectively. The sensitivity and specificity for the diagnosis of brucellosis 62.9% and 100% for STA, respectively; 33.3% and 66.6% for Brucella-IgM; and 66.6% and 100% for Brucella-IgG. BCGT was significantly correlated with STA (κ= 0.590) and Brucella-IgG (κ=0.539)Conclusion: BCGT can be utilized as a simple and reliable test in the diagnosis of brucellosis with high sensitivity and specificity. Nevertheless, the sensitivity and specificity of BCGT should be demonstrated by comprehensive studies, including culture-confirmed cases and control groups.

🔖

Cite This Article

ADELETİ, R., KUYUMCU, Ç. A., EROL, S., ŞENBAYRAK, S., BARKAY, O., DENİZ, S. (2022). Comparison of Coombs Gel Test with ELISAand Standard Tube Agglutination TestsUsed in Serological Diagnosis of Brucellosis. Infectious diseases and clinical microbiology (Online), Cilt: 2 - Sayı: 1, 1–7. https://ajindex.com/articles/539094

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (14)

  1. 1 Doğanay M, Alp Meşe E. Bruselloz. Willke Topçu A, Söyletir G, Doğanay M, editors. Enfeksiyon hastalıkları ve mikrobiyolojisi. 3th ed. Ankara: Nobel Tıp Kitabevleri
  2. p.897-909. 2 Sümerkan B. Brucella Türleri. Willke Topçu A, Söyletir G, Doğanay M, editors. Enfeksiyon hastalıkları ve mikrobiyolojisi. 3th ed. Ankara: Nobel Tıp Kitabevleri
  3. p.2237-43. 3 Hume R, Snyder JW. Biyoterörizm etkenlerinin laboratuvar tanısı. Murray PR, Baron EJ, Landry ML, Jorgensen JH, Pfaller MA. Translation editor: Başustaoğlu A. Klinik mikrobiyoloji 9th ed. Ankara: Atlas Kitapçılık Tic. Ltd. şti
  4. p.107-17. 4 Gül HC, Erdem H. Brucella species. Mandel GL, Bennet JE, Dolin R, editors. Principles and Practice of Infectious Disease. 8th ed. Vol 2, 2016. p.2584-88. 5 Ulusal Mikrobiyoloji Standartları, Mikrobiyolojik Tanımlama / Bakteriyoloji, Sürüm: 1.1 / B-MT-19 / Bruselloz 01.01.2015:1-27. 6 http://www.toprakmedikal.com/urunler.aspx?id=4, ODAK Brucella Coombs jel test. Date of access: 20.09.2016. 7 Araj GF. Update on laboratory diagnosis of human brucellosis. Int J Antimicrob Agents 2010
  5. 8 Pappas G, Akritidis N, Bosilkovski M, Tsianos E. Brucellosis. N Engl J Med 2005
  6. 9 Kocagöz T. Türkiye’de mikrobiyoloji alanında bilime dayalı üretim. ANKEM Derg 2014
  7. 10 Türk Dağı H, Fındık D. Bruselloz tanısında yeni bir yöntem: Brucella Coombs jel test. Genel Tıp Derg 2016
  8. 11 İrvem A, Yücel FM, Aksaray S, Bor E. Brusellozun serolojik tanısında yeni ve hızlı bir yöntem olan Brucella Coombs jel testi ile diğer yöntemlerin karşılaştırılması. Mikrobiyol Bul 2015
  9. 12 Kalem F, Ergün AG, Durmaz S, Doğan M, Ertuğrul Ö, Gündem S. Comparison of a new and rapid method: Brucella Coombs jel test with other diagnostic tests. J Clin Lab Anal 2016
  10. 756–59. 13 Turhanoğlu NM, Gür VD. The comparison of Brucella jel agglutination test with other Brucella tests. Dicle Med J 2015
  11. 14 Hanci H, Igan H, Uyanik MH. Evaluation of a new and rapid serologic test for detecting brucellosis: Brucella Coombs jel test. Pak J Biol Sci 2017
  12. 15 Koroglu M, Akkaya AO, Demiray T, Erkorkmaz U, Ozbek A, Altindis M. Comparative evaluation of the Brucella Coombs jel test in laboratory diagnosis of human brucellosis. J Biotechnol 2016
  13. 16 Kandemir Ö. Bruselloz. Türkiye Klinikleri. J Inf Dis-Special Topics 2015
  14. 17 Özdemir M, Feyzioglu B, Kurtoglu MG, Dogan M, Dagi HT, Yuksekkaya S, et al. A comparison of immuncapture