Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12188/23594
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorGómez-Morales, María Ángelesen_US
dc.contributor.authorPezzotti, Patrizioen_US
dc.contributor.authorLudovisi, Alessandraen_US
dc.contributor.authorBoufana, Belgeesen_US
dc.contributor.authorDorny, Pierreen_US
dc.contributor.authorKortbeek, Titiaen_US
dc.contributor.authorBlocher, Joachimen_US
dc.contributor.authorSchmidt, Veronikaen_US
dc.contributor.authorAmati, Marcoen_US
dc.contributor.authorGabriël, Sarahen_US
dc.contributor.authorPozio, Edoardoen_US
dc.contributor.authorWinkler, Andrea Sylviaen_US
dc.contributor.authorParticipants, The Ring Trialen_US
dc.contributor.authorJurhar Pavlova, Majaen_US
dc.date.accessioned2022-10-18T12:48:24Z-
dc.date.available2022-10-18T12:48:24Z-
dc.date.issued2021-05-29-
dc.identifier.issn2076-2607-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12188/23594-
dc.description.abstractLaboratory tools for diagnosing taeniosis/cysticercosis in non-endemic countries are available; however, there is little data on their performance. To provide information on the sensitivity, specificity, and reproducibility of these tools, inter-laboratory studies were organized within the EU COST-Action CYSTINET (TD1302). Two serological and one coprological Ring Trials (RTs) were organized to test a panel of human-derived sera and stool samples using assays routinely conducted by the participating laboratories to detect Taenia spp. infections. Four Western blots (WBs) and five ELISAs were used by nine laboratories for cysticercosis diagnosis. In the first serological RT, the overall sensitivity was 67.6% (95% CI, 59.1-75.4), whereas specificity was 97% (95% CI, 89.8-99.6). WBs recorded the best accuracy. A second serological RT was organized, to assess the three tests most frequently used during the first RT. Two out of six laboratories performed all the three tests. The overall sensitivity and specificity were 52.8% (95% CI, 42.8-62.7) and 98.1% (95% CI, 93.2-99.7), respectively. Laboratory performance strongly affected test results. Twelve laboratories participated in the coprological RT using conventional microscopy and six laboratories used molecular assays. Traditional diagnosis by microscopy yielded better results than molecular diagnosis. This may have been influenced by the lack of standardization of molecular tests across participating laboratories.en_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherMDPI AGen_US
dc.relation.ispartofMicroorganismsen_US
dc.titleCollaborative Studies for the Detection of Taenia spp. Infections in Humans within CYSTINET, the European Network on Taeniosis/Cysticercosisen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.identifier.doi10.3390/microorganisms9061173-
dc.identifier.urlhttps://www.mdpi.com/2076-2607/9/6/1173/pdf-
dc.identifier.volume9-
dc.identifier.issue6-
dc.identifier.fpage1173-
item.grantfulltextnone-
item.fulltextNo Fulltext-
crisitem.author.deptFaculty of Medicine-
Appears in Collections:Faculty of Medicine: Journal Articles
Show simple item record

Page view(s)

40
checked on May 20, 2024

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.