2016
DOI: 10.4103/0255-0857.174114
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Identification of opportunistic enteric parasites among immunocompetent patients with diarrhoea from Northern India and genetic characterisation of Cryptosporidium and Microsporidia

Abstract: Opportunistic enteric parasitic infestation was more common among immunocompetent patients with diarrhoea than healthy subjects. Special staining as well as molecular methods are essential for appropriate diagnosis of these parasites.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

1
8
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 16 publications
(9 citation statements)
references
References 46 publications
1
8
0
Order By: Relevance
“…A prevalence of 41.3% of microsporidia in the colon tissue of patients with CC was found, compared to 0% of microsporidia in the colon tissues of healthy subjects. The prevalence rate of microsporidia infection in immunocompetent subjects ranges from 0% to 50% in different countries, although most studies are based on the detection of spores in feces with a few in urine [ 19 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 ].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A prevalence of 41.3% of microsporidia in the colon tissue of patients with CC was found, compared to 0% of microsporidia in the colon tissues of healthy subjects. The prevalence rate of microsporidia infection in immunocompetent subjects ranges from 0% to 50% in different countries, although most studies are based on the detection of spores in feces with a few in urine [ 19 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 ].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In contrast, other studies showed higher rates of infection [3334]. This coccidian parasite can be found in immunocompetent and immunocompromised patients [35,36] and is responsible for traveller’s diarrhea [37].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The mIHS method consistently detected significantly higher rates of Blastocystis spp. and G. intestinalis at hospital C and significantly higher rates of D. fragilis when compared with the IHS-only method at hospital A and wet preparation microscopy at hospital B. Microscopy remains a widely used tool for protozoan detection, even in low prevalence settings such as Sydney (Bruijnesteijn Van Coppenraet et al 2009; Ghoshal et al 2016). While molecular methods are more sensitive for pathogen detection, these tools are still not widely available or routinely employed even in developed settings (Fletcher et al 2012; Ghoshal et al 2016).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%