Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-lj6df Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-20T05:15:16.127Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Experience in Northern Nigeria with countercurrent immunoelectrophoresis, double diffusion and indirect haemagglutination tests for diagnosis of hydatid cyst in camels

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 November 2009

B. J. O. Dada ,
D. S. Adegboye  and
A. N. Mohammed
B. J. O. Dada
Affiliation:
Departments of Parasitology and Entomology, Pathology and Microbiology, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, Nigeria
D. S. Adegboye
Affiliation:
Departments of Parasitology and Entomology, Pathology and Microbiology, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, Nigeria
A. N. Mohammed
Affiliation:
Departments of Parasitology and Entomology, Pathology and Microbiology, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, Nigeria
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Sera from 36 slaughtered camels with proven hydatid disease, from 46 camels found to be free of hydatidosis at post-mortem meat inspection, and from 26 animals with confirmed caprine heartwater, bovine trypanosomiasis and cysticercosis were examined. The indirect haemagglutination was found to be the most sensitive but least specific of the three tests. Ouchterlony's double diffusion (DD) test was specific and fairly sensitive. Although the countercurrent immunoelectrophoresis was as specific as DD, it was the least sensitive of the three serological tests.

All three serological tests were always positive in camels with hydatid cyst infection affecting both the liver and the lung. A combination of indirect haemagglutination and Ouchterlony's double diffusion tests could be useful for diagnosing hydatidosis in camels and probably other animals.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Helminthology , Volume 55 , Issue 3 , September 1981 , pp. 197 - 202
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1981

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Arabatiz, G. & Papapanagitou, J. (1963) Laboratory test in hydatid disease. Comparison of indirect haemagglutination, complement fixation and intradermal tests. Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 28, 266–269.Google Scholar
Capron, A.. Yarzabal, L. A., Vernes, A. & Fruit, J. (1970) Le diagnostic immunologique de I'echinococcosc humaine. Pathologique Biologique, 18, 357–365.Google Scholar
Enayat, M. S. & Pezeshki, M. (1977) The comparison pfcounter-immunoelectrophoresis with indirect haemagglutination test for detection of antibodies in experimentally infected guinea pigs with Toxocara canis. Journal of Helminthology, 51, 143–148.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Garabedian, G. A., Matossian, R. M. & Djanian, A. J. (1957) An indirect haemagglutination test for hydatid disease. Journal of Immunology, 78, 269–272.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kagan, I. G. (1973a) Enfermeda hidatidica. Torax, 22, 196–202.Google Scholar
Kagan, I. G. (1973b) Diagnostico immunologico de la enfermedad hidatidica. Torax, 23, 232–236.Google Scholar
Kagan, I. G. & Norman, L. (1961) Antigenic analysis of Echinococcus antigens by agar diffusion techniques. American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene, 10, 727–734.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stavitsky, A. B. (1954) Micromethods for the study of proteins and antibodies I. Procedure and general applications of haemagglutination and haemaggiutination-inhibition reactions with tannic acid and protein-treated red blood cells. Journal of Immunology, 72, 360–367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Varela-Diaz, V. M., Guisantes, J., Ricardes, M. I, Yarzabal, L. A. & Coltorti, E. A. (1975a) Evaluation of whole and purified hydatid fluid antigens in the diagnosis of human hydatidosis by the immunoelectrophoresis test. American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene, 24, 298–303.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Varela-Diaz, V. M., Lopez-Lemes, M. H., Prezioso, U., Coltorti, E. A. & Yarzabal, L. A. (1975b). Evaluation of four variants of the indirect haemagglutination test for human hydatidosis. American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene, 24, 304–311.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Varela-Diaz, V. M., Coltorti, E. A., Prezioso, U., Lopex-Lemes, M. H., Guisantes, J. A. & Yarzabal, L. A. (1975c) Evaluation of three immunodiagnostic tests for human hydatid disease. American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene, 24, 312–319.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Warner, A. & Filiza, K. (1970) An evaluation of diagnostic tests in hydatid disease. American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene, 19, 934–935.Google Scholar
Williams, J. F., Perez-Esandi, M. V. & Oriol, R. (1971). Evaluation of purified lipoprotein antigens of Echinococcus gramulosus in the immunodiagnosis of human infection. American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene, 20, 575–579.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yarzabal, L. A., Leiton, J. & Lopez-Lemes, M. H. (1974) The diagnosis of pulmonary human hydatidosis by the immunoelectrophoresis test. American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene, 23, 662–666.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed