Polymerase Chain Reaction-Based Assays for the Diagnosis of Active and Relapsed Cases of Human Brucellosis.

Mohammad Reza Hasanjani Roushan, Seyed Mahmoud Amin Marashi, Zahra Moulana
Author Information
  1. Mohammad Reza Hasanjani Roushan: Infectious Diseases and Tropical Medicine Research Center, Babol University of Medical Sciences, Babol, Iran.
  2. Seyed Mahmoud Amin Marashi: Department of Microbiology and Immunology, Alborz University of Medical Sciences, Karaj, Iran.
  3. Zahra Moulana: Infectious Diseases and Tropical Medicine Research Center, Babol University of Medical Sciences, Babol, Iran. zmoulana@yahoo.com.

Abstract

This study aimed to compare polymerase chain reaction (PCR) with serum agglutination test (SAT) in the diagnosis of patients before and 6 months after treatment. Peripheral blood specimens from 50 patients with brucellosis (case group) and 30 subjects without brucellosis (control group) were selected and entered into the study. The diagnosis of brucellosis was established using SAT ≥ 1:160 and 2-mercaptoethanol (2-ME) ≥ 1:80 with clinical signs and symptoms compatible with brucellosis. For each case, both before treatment and 6 months after completion of therapy, SAT, 2-ME, and PCR were performed. Subjects in the control group were assessed by the same tests at the initial visit. In the case group, 50 patients (36 males, 14 females) with the mean age of 43.6 ± 14.5 years were evaluated. The mean age of the control group was 40.6 ± 14 years. Among the 50 patients whose nested PCR assays were initially positive, 43 (86%) were negative 6 months after completing treatment. Relapse occurred in five (10%) patients within 6 months after treatment and all were PCR positive. None of the patients in the control group was PCR positive. Results show that PCR seems to be highly sensitive and specific, and therefore is a useful method for both the initial diagnosis and detection of relapse or chronic brucellosis.

References

  1. Prilozi. 2010;31(1):65-89 [PMID: 20703184]
  2. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2010 May;65(5):1028-35 [PMID: 20215128]
  3. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2010 Nov;36 Suppl 1:S12-7 [PMID: 20692128]
  4. J Clin Microbiol. 2009 Jul;47(7):2084-9 [PMID: 19420176]
  5. Arch Iran Med. 2015 Jan;18(1):44-50 [PMID: 25556386]
  6. Int J Infect Dis. 2010 Mar;14(3):e250-3 [PMID: 19648045]
  7. J Lab Physicians. 2010 Jul;2(2):55-60 [PMID: 21346896]
  8. Clin Infect Dis. 2006 May 1;42(9):1266-73 [PMID: 16586386]
  9. Iran J Pathol. 2016 Spring;11(2):144-50 [PMID: 27499776]
  10. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2007 Apr;76(4):698-702 [PMID: 17426173]
  11. Int J Prev Med. 2011 Jul;2(3):170-7 [PMID: 21811660]
  12. BMC Infect Dis. 2013 Mar 21;13:145 [PMID: 23517532]
  13. J Med Microbiol. 2005 Aug;54(Pt 8):727-30 [PMID: 16014425]
  14. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2014 Dec;58(12):7541-4 [PMID: 25246401]
  15. Jpn J Infect Dis. 2011;64(4):272-6 [PMID: 21788700]
  16. J Clin Microbiol. 2007 Apr;45(4):1211-8 [PMID: 17267626]
  17. FEMS Immunol Med Microbiol. 2002 Oct 11;34(2):147-51 [PMID: 12381466]
  18. Ann Agric Environ Med. 2013;20(2):233-8 [PMID: 23772567]
  19. Ann Trop Med Parasitol. 2002 Jun;96(4):397-403 [PMID: 12171621]
  20. Clin Diagn Lab Immunol. 2000 Sep;7(5):835-9 [PMID: 10973465]
  21. Vet Microbiol. 2009 May 28;137(1-2):156-64 [PMID: 19200666]
  22. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2010 Nov;36 Suppl 1:S18-20 [PMID: 20692127]
  23. Croat Med J. 2010 Aug;51(4):306-13 [PMID: 20718083]
  24. Clin Infect Dis. 2008 Jun 15;46(12):e131-6 [PMID: 18462106]
  25. Expert Rev Anti Infect Ther. 2011 Jul;9(7):833-45 [PMID: 21810055]
  26. Rev Sci Tech. 2013 Apr;32(1):137-47 [PMID: 23837372]
  27. Infect Chemother. 2015 Dec;47(4):268-71 [PMID: 26788412]
  28. Ann Clin Microbiol Antimicrob. 2014 Aug 01;13:31 [PMID: 25082566]
  29. J Infect Public Health. 2012 Apr;5(2):189-94 [PMID: 22541267]
  30. J Trop Med Hyg. 1992 Aug;95(4):271-5 [PMID: 1495123]
  31. BMJ. 2008 Mar 29;336(7646):678-9 [PMID: 18321958]
  32. Rev Sci Tech. 2013 Apr;32(1):177-88 [PMID: 23837375]
  33. Pol J Microbiol. 2011;60(1):27-33 [PMID: 21630571]

MeSH Term

Adolescent
Adult
Aged
Brucellosis
Female
Humans
Male
Middle Aged
Polymerase Chain Reaction
Recurrence
Young Adult

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0PCRpatients6groupbrucellosismonthstreatmentcontrolSATdiagnosis50case14positivestudy2-MEinitialmeanage43±yearsaimedcomparepolymerasechainreactionserumagglutinationtestPeripheralbloodspecimens30subjectswithoutselectedenteredestablishedusing1:1602-mercaptoethanol1:80clinicalsignssymptomscompatiblecompletiontherapyperformedSubjectsassessedtestsvisit36malesfemales5evaluated40Amongwhosenestedassaysinitially86%negativecompletingRelapseoccurredfive10%withinNoneResultsshowseemshighlysensitivespecificthereforeusefulmethoddetectionrelapsechronicPolymeraseChainReaction-BasedAssaysDiagnosisActiveRelapsedCasesHumanBrucellosis

Similar Articles

Cited By