title: Comparison of PCR and antigen detection methods for diagnosis of Entamoeba histolytica infection.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  To assess different laboratory methods for the identification of Entamoeba histolytica in clinical samples.
  
  
  METHODS
  Antigen detection enzyme linked immunosorbent assay, polymerase chain reaction solution hybridisation enzyme linked immunoassay (PCR-SHELA), and a commercial Lightcycler PCR were compared using 101 stool and pus samples.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Fifteen of the 101 samples were positive for E histolytica by one or more method. There were discrepancies between the results in five of these 15 samples when the assays were compared.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  All three methods performed adequately, so that the choice of assay will depend on each individual laboratory's budget and projected turnaround time.
authors.affiliation: Department of Microbiology, Cecil Fleming House, University College London Hospital, Grafton Way, London WC1H, UK. sfurrows@aol.com
authors.forename: S J
authors.initials: SJ
authors.lastname: Furrows
authors.forename: A H
authors.initials: AH
authors.lastname: Moody
authors.forename: P L
authors.initials: PL
authors.lastname: Chiodini
mesh_terms: D000818:Animals; D000953:Antigens, Protozoan / Q000032:analysis*; D016054:DNA, Protozoan / Q000032:analysis; D004748:Entamoeba histolytica / Q000276:immunology / Q000302:isolation & purification; D004749:Entamoebiasis / Q000175:diagnosis* / Q000276:immunology; D004797:Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay / Q000379:methods; D005243:Feces / Q000469:parasitology; D006801:Humans; D009693:Nucleic Acid Hybridization; D016133:Polymerase Chain Reaction / Q000379:methods*
chemical_list: D000953:Antigens, Protozoan; D016054:DNA, Protozoan