Evaluation of three commercial rapid kits to detect Cryptosporidium parvum in diarrhoeic calf stool

Abstract

The aim of this study was to evaluate three commercially available rapid immunochromatographic tests for detection of Cryptosporidium parvum antigens in faeces of naturally infected neonatal diarrhoeic calves. FASTest V R CRYPTO strip, FASTest V R CRYPTO-GIARDIA Strip and TETRASTRIPS V R were compared for their sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value using a cumulative positivity as gold standard. In addition, the agreement between each test and the gold standard was evaluated by Cohen's Kappa (k) value. The highest infection rate was observed by FASTest V R CRYPTO-GIARDIA Strip (65.15%), followed by FASTest V R CRYPTO strip (63.64%) and TETRASTRIPS V R (56.06%,). A very good diagnostic performance of all the three tests was observed. FASTest V R CRYPTO strip (k ¼ 0.935) and FASTest V R CRYPTO-GIARDIA Strip (k ¼ 0.968) had the highest sensitivity (100%) while TETRASTRIPS V R (k ¼ 0.875) had the highest specificity (100%). Eimeria spp oocysts were present in six samples but cross-reaction with this protozoan was not observed. These assays were not time-consuming and very easy to perform and to read. Based on our results, we recommend the use of FASTest V R CRYPTO strip, FASTest V R CRYPTO-GIARDIA Strip or/and TETRASTRIPS V R for detection of C. parvum antigens in faeces of neonatal diarrhoeic calves.

Molecular characterisation and risk factor analysis of Cryptosporidium spp. in calves from Italy

“…E p i d e m i o l o g i c a l s t u d i e s o n t h e p r e s e n c e o f Cryptosporidium spp. in Italian cattle farms are still limited; prevalences ranging from 5 to 11.4% (Merildi et al 2009;Duranti et al 2009;Di Piazza et al 2013) have been reported, although the percentage of positives increases (50-62.1%) when only diarrhoeic calves are considered (Grana et al 2006;Papini et al 2018). At least five Cryptosporidium species, including C. bovis, C. ryanae, C. ubiquitum and C. hominis, have been identified in cattle from Italy, but C.…”

Performance of a rapid diagnostic test for the detection of Cryptosporidium spp. in African children admitted to hospital with diarrhea

“…Numerous diagnostic techniques have been used to detect Cryptosporidium infection in humans and animals. They include the use of faecal smears stained by the modified Ziehl-Neelsen technique, Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISA) and polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assays [13][14]. A comprehensive overview into the detection and molecular characterization of Cryptosporidium has been described elsewhere [15] The above mentioned methods have drawbacks such as being time-consuming and relatively expensive, as well as requiring well-equipped laboratories and well-trained or skilled personnel [14][15][16].…”

“…CGE, Crypto/Giardia Duo-Strip, RIDA QUICK Cryptosporidium/Giardia/Entamoeba Combi and Giardia/Cryptosporidium Quik Check the authors observed varying sensitivities ranging from 92 to 100% and 100% specificities for all RDT brands for the detection of Cryptosporidium when compared to ELISA, microscopy, and qPCR as gold standards [17]. In addition, these RDTs demonstrate varying performances, and some of them are not well validated for the detection of less frequent non-parvum/hominis Cryptosporidium species [2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18].…”

“…Numerous diagnostic techniques have been used to detect Cryptosporidium infection in humans and animals. They include the use of faecal smears stained by the modified Ziehl–Neelsen technique, Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISA) and polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assays [ 13 – 14 ]. A comprehensive overview into the detection and molecular characterization of Cryptosporidium has been described elsewhere [ 15 ]…”

“…The above mentioned methods have drawbacks such as being time-consuming and relatively expensive, as well as requiring well-equipped laboratories and well-trained or skilled personnel [ 14 – 16 ].…”