Paragonimus infection laboratory findings: Difference between revisions

Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
m (Changes made per Mahshid's request)
 
(One intermediate revision by one other user not shown)
Line 2: Line 2:
{{Paragonimus infection}}
{{Paragonimus infection}}
{{CMG}}
{{CMG}}
Please help WikiDoc by adding more content here. It's easy!  Click  [[Help:How_to_Edit_a_Page|here]]  to learn about editing.


==Overview==
==Overview==
Line 27: Line 25:
{{reflist|2}}
{{reflist|2}}


[[Category:Needs content]]
[[Category:Disease]]
[[Category:Disease]]
[[Category:Infectious disease]]
 
{{WH}}
{{WH}}
{{WS}}
{{WS}}

Latest revision as of 18:37, 18 September 2017

Paragonimus infection Microchapters

Home

Patient Information

Overview

Historical Perspective

Pathophysiology

Causes

Differentiating Paragonimus infection from other Diseases

Epidemiology and Demographics

Risk Factors

Natural History, Complications and Prognosis

Diagnosis

History and Symptoms

Physical Examination

Laboratory Findings

Chest X Ray

CT

MRI

Ultrasound

Other Imaging Findings

Other Diagnostic Studies

Treatment

Medical Therapy

Primary Prevention

Cost-Effectiveness of Therapy

Future or Investigational Therapies

Case Studies

Case #1

Paragonimus infection laboratory findings On the Web

Most recent articles

Most cited articles

Review articles

CME Programs

Powerpoint slides

Images

American Roentgen Ray Society Images of Paragonimus infection laboratory findings

All Images
X-rays
Echo & Ultrasound
CT Images
MRI

Ongoing Trials at Clinical Trials.gov

US National Guidelines Clearinghouse

NICE Guidance

FDA onParagonimus infection laboratory findings

CDC on Paragonimus infection laboratory findings

Paragonimus infection laboratory findings in the news

Blogs on Paragonimus infection laboratory findings

Directions to Hospitals Treating Paragonimus infection

Risk calculators and risk factors for Paragonimus infection laboratory findings

Editor-In-Chief: C. Michael Gibson, M.S., M.D. [1]

Overview

Diagnosis is based on microscopic demonstration of eggs in stool or sputum, but these are not present until 2 to 3 months after infection. (Eggs are also occasionally encountered in effusion fluid or biopsy material.) Concentration techniques may be necessary in patients with light infections. Biopsy may allow diagnostic confirmation and species identification when an adult or developing fluke is recovered.

Laboratory Findings

Peripheral eosinophilia is common and can be intense, especially during the early larval migration stages.

Sputum examined microscopically may reveal Paragonimus eggs released by the flukes in the lungs. Keep in mind that the acid-fast stain that is used for TB testing of sputum destroys eggs. The eggs may also be found by multiple stool exams on different days as a result of coughed-up eggs that are swallowed. The microscopic eggs are yellowish brown, 80-120 µm long by 45-70 µm wide, thick-shelled, and with an obvious operculum. Serologic tests can be especially useful for early infections (prior to maturation of flukes) or for ectopic infections where eggs are not passed in stool.

Microscopy

Egg of Paragonimus westermani
Egg of Paragonimus westermani

A: Egg of Paragonimus westermani. The average egg size is 85 µm by 53 µm (range: 68 to 118 µm by 39 to 67 µm). They are yellow-brown, ovoidal or elongate, with a thick shell, and often asymmetrical with one end slightly flattened. At the large end, the operculum is clearly visible. The opposite (abopercular) end is thickened. The eggs of P. westermani are excreted unembryonated.

Eggs of P. kellicotti in a Pap-stained bronchial alveolar lavage (BAL) specimen at 400x magnification. Images courtesy of Dr. Gary Procop.
Left: Eggs of Paragonimus sp. taken from a lung biopsy stained with hematoxylin and eosin (H&E). These eggs measured 80-90 µm by 40-45 µm. The species was not identified in this case. Right: P. westermani adult, this approximately 1cm long fluke is viewed under magnification. Credit: DPDx

Antibody Detection

Pulmonary paragonimiasis is the most common presentation of patients infected with Paragonimus spp., although extrapulmonary (cerebral, abdominal) paragonimiasis may occur. Detection of eggs in sputum or feces of patients with paragonimiasis is often very difficult; therefore, serodiagnosis may be very helpful in confirming infections and for monitoring the results of individual chemotherapy. In the United States, detection of antibodies to Paragonimus westermani has helped physicians differentiate paragonimiasis from tuberculosis in Indochinese immigrants. The complement fixation (CF) test has been the standard test for paragonimiasis; it is highly sensitive for diagnosis and for assessing cure after therapy. Because of the technical difficulties of CF, enzyme immunoassay (EIA) tests were developed as a replacement. The immunoblot (IB) assay performed with a crude antigen extract of P. westermani has been in use at CDC since 1988. Positive reactions, based on demonstration of an 8-kDa antigen-antibody band were obtained with serum samples of 96% of patients with parasitologically confirmed P. westermani infection. Specificity was >99%; of 210 serum specimens from patients with other parasitic and non-parasitic infections, only 1 serum sample from a patient with Schistosoma haematobium reacted. Antibody levels detected by EIA and IB do decline after chemotherapeutic cure but not as rapidly as those detected by the CF test. Most published literature deals with pulmonary paragonimiasis due to P. westermani although in some geographic areas other Paragonimus species cause similar or distinct clinical manifestations in human infections. Cross-reactivity between species does occur but at varying levels for different species. Thus, use of a test for P. westermani may not allow detection of antibodies to other Paragonimus species.

References

Template:WH Template:WS