A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 197

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 197
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 271
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3165
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 597
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 511
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 317
Function: require_once

Commercial Simplex and Multiplex PCR Assays for the Detection of Intestinal Parasites , spp., and spp.: Comparative Evaluation of Seven Commercial PCR Kits with Routine In-House Simplex PCR Assays. | LitMetric

Category Ranking

98%

Total Visits

921

Avg Visit Duration

2 minutes

Citations

20

Article Abstract

Nowadays, many commercial kits allowing the detection of digestive parasites by DNA amplification methods have been developed, including simplex PCR assays (SimpPCRa) allowing the identification of a single parasite, and multiplex PCR assays (MultPCRa) allowing the identification of several parasites at once. Thus, aimed at improving the diagnosis of intestinal protozoal infections, it is essential to evaluate the performances of these new tools. A total of 174 DNA samples collected between 2007 and 2017 were retrospectively included in this study. Performances of four commercial SimpPCRa (i.e., CerTest-VIASURE) and three MultPCRa (i.e., CerTest-VIASURE, FAST-TRACK-Diagnostics-FTD-Stool-Parasite and DIAGENODE-Gastroenteritis/Parasite-panel-I) were evaluated for the detection of spp., spp., and in stool samples compared to our routinely used in-house SimpPCRa. Globally, the SimpPCRa showed better sensitivity/specificity for the detection of , , and spp. (i.e., 96.9/93.6%; 100/100%; 95.5/100%; and 100/99.3%, respectively), compared to the three commercial MultPCRa tested. All in all, we showed that MultPCRa offer an interesting alternative for the detection of protozoans in stool samples depending on the clinical context.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8623296PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms9112325DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

pcr assays
16
multiplex pcr
8
spp spp
8
simplex pcr
8
allowing identification
8
detection spp
8
stool samples
8
commercial
5
pcr
5
detection
5

Similar Publications