EVALUATIONOF LABORATORY DIAGNOSIS IN AMOEBICDYSENTERY

Q: How can I download an article?

To download an article from SID, first log in to the site, search for the article title, and click on the 'Download Article' option.

Q: How can I download an ISI article?

To download an ISI article on SID, enter the keyword or article title in the search bar, view the relevant results, click on the desired article, and select the 'Download Article' option.

Q: How can I access the SID database?

To access the SID database, visit SID.ir, create an account, and log in to access scientific resources.

Q: Is downloading articles from SID free?

Some articles on SID are available for free, while others require payment. Details are specified on the article's page.

HOUSHYAR HOSSEIN; REZAEIAN MOSTAFA

مرکز اطلاعات علمی Scientific Information Database (SID) - Trusted Source for Research and Academic Resources

Journal Paper

Paper Information

Journal: Journal of Medical Council of Iran Year:2000 | Volume:18 | Issue:3 Page(s): 198-202

Download Full-Text

Persian Verion

View:

3,616

Download:

Cites:

Information Journal Paper

Title

EVALUATIONOF LABORATORY DIAGNOSIS IN AMOEBICDYSENTERY

Author(s)

HOUSHYAR HOSSEIN | REZAEIAN MOSTAFA | Issue Writer Certificate

Keywords

ENTAMOEBA HISTOLYTICAQ4

DYSENTERYQ3

LABORATORY DIAGNOSISQ4

Abstract

One of the major problems in the parasitology unit of medical laboratories is diagnosis of amoebic DYSENTERY and distinguishing it from other forms of DYSENTERY.The correct diagnosis of intestinal amoebiasis depends on many factors including the degree of personal skills, choosing the appropriate technique, and rapid examination of freshly passed stool specimen. This study was performed from September 1998 to March 1999.53 cases of amoebic DYSENTERY and 18 cases of nonamoebic DYSENTERY were reexamined in 7 public and private laboratories in different areas of Tehran and Karaj. Three different methods used in this study were direct examination of the stool diluted with saline, cultured in Hsr+s medium and trichrom staining. Among 53 cases reported by laboratory personnel as positive for ENTAMOEBA HISTOLYTICA, 12(22.6%) were true positive and 41(77.4%) were false positive. All 18 cases reported as nonamoebic DYSENTERY were true negative for ENTAMOEBA HISTOLYTICA.The most common agents confused with ENTAMOEBA HISTOLYTICA were macrophage and polymorphonuclear cells. Entamoeba coli trophozoite, Endolimax nan. Dientamoeba fragilis and Blastocystis hominis were also mistaken with ENTAMOEBA HISTOLYTICA.

Cites

مشکلات آمیبیاز و تشخیص آزمایشگاهی آن

References

Cite

APA: Copy

HOUSHYAR, HOSSEIN, & REZAEIAN, MOSTAFA. (2000). EVALUATIONOF LABORATORY DIAGNOSIS IN AMOEBICDYSENTERY. JOURNAL OF MEDICAL COUNCIL OF I.R.I., 18(3), 198-202. SID. https://sid.ir/paper/41442/en

Vancouver: Copy

HOUSHYAR HOSSEIN, REZAEIAN MOSTAFA. EVALUATIONOF LABORATORY DIAGNOSIS IN AMOEBICDYSENTERY. JOURNAL OF MEDICAL COUNCIL OF I.R.I.[Internet]. 2000;18(3):198-202. Available from: https://sid.ir/paper/41442/en

IEEE: Copy

HOSSEIN HOUSHYAR, and MOSTAFA REZAEIAN, “EVALUATIONOF LABORATORY DIAGNOSIS IN AMOEBICDYSENTERY,” JOURNAL OF MEDICAL COUNCIL OF I.R.I., vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 198–202, 2000, [Online]. Available: https://sid.ir/paper/41442/en

Related Journal Papers