E-ISSN: 1308-5255 ISSN: 1307-7635
The Diagnostic Value of Lesional Skin Smears Performed by Experienced Specialist in Cutaneous Leishmaniasis and Routine Microbiology Laboratory
PDF
Cite
Share
Request
Original Investigation
VOLUME: 13 ISSUE: 1
P: 1-5
March 2019

The Diagnostic Value of Lesional Skin Smears Performed by Experienced Specialist in Cutaneous Leishmaniasis and Routine Microbiology Laboratory

DOI: 10.4274/tdd.galenos.2018.3812
İsa An 1
Mehmet Harman 2
İbrahim Çavuş 3
Ahmet Özbilgin 3
1. Şanlıurfa Eğitim ve Araştırma Hastanesi, Deri ve Zührevi Hastalıkları Kliniği, Şanlıurfa, Türkiye
2. Dicle Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi, Deri ve Zührevi Hastalıkları Anabilim Dalı, Diyarbakır, Türkiye
3. Manisa Celal Bayar Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi, Parazitoloji Anabilim Dalı, Manisa, Türkiye
No information available.
No information available
Received Date: 16.08.2018
Accepted Date: 08.10.2018
Publish Date: 21.05.2019
PDF
Cite
Share
Request

ABSTRACT

Objective:

Leishmaniasis is a common vector-borne infection affecting 12 million people in 98 countries. The most frequently used method in diagnosis is the microscopic investigation of the leishmania smears. The diagnostic value of this method varies according to the experience of the evaluator. In this prospective study, it was aimed to emphasize the importance of experience in the evaluation of lesional smears used in the diagnosis of cutaneous leishmaniasis.

Methods:

In this study, patients who were admitted to Dicle University Medical Faculty Hospital Dermatological and Venereal Diseases Outpatient Clinic between January and December 2016 and who had lesions with suspicious cutaneous leishmaniasis were included. For all the cases, both in the routine microbiology laboratory and in the diagnosis and treatment of cutaneous leishmaniasis, separate smears were performed by an experienced specialist and evaluated independently from each other.

Results:

In 70 of 98 cases studied, the diagnosis of cutaneous leishmaniasis was confirmed by laboratory evaluations. The rate of positivity was significantly higher in the smears analyzed by experienced specialist in the clinical and diagnosis of cutaneous leishmaniasis (95.7%) than in the smears analyzed by the routine microbiology laboratory (42.9%) (p<0.001).

Conclusion:

The data in our study showed that smears should be performed and evaluated by experienced specialists in the clinical and diagnosis of cutaneous leishmaniasis.

References

1Uzun S, Gürel MS, Durdu M, et al. Clinical practice guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of cutaneous leishmaniasis in Turkey. Int J Dermatol 2018;57:973-82.
2Salman IS, Vural A, Unver A, et al. Cutaneous leishmaniasis cases in nizip, Turkey after the Syrian civil war. Mikrobiyol Bul 2014;48:106-13.
3Turhanoglu M, Alp Erdal S, Bayindir Bilman F. A nine-year evaluation of cutaneous leishmaniasis patients in Diyarbakir Training and Research Hospital, Turkey. Mikrobiyol Bul 2014;48:335-40.
4Khatri ML, Di Muccio T, Gramiccia M. Cutaneous leishmaniasis in North-Western Yemen: a clinicoepidemiologic study and leishmania species identification by polymerase chain reaction-restriction fragment length polymorphism analysis. J Am Acad Dermatol 2009;61:e15-21.
5Rahman SB, Bari AU. Laboratory profile in patients of cutaneous leishmaniais from various regions of Pakistan. J Coll Physicians Surg Pak 2003;13:313-36.
6Özensoy Toz S, Çulha G, Yıldız Zeyrek F, et al. A real-time ITS1-pcr based method in the diagnosis and species identifications of leishmania parasite from human and dog clinical samples in Turkey. Plos Negl Trop Dis 2013;7:e2205.
7Özbilgin A, Harman M, Karakuş M, et al. Leishmaniasis in Turkey: visceral and cutaneous leishmaniasis caused by leishmania donovani in Turkey. Acta Trop 2017;173:90-6.
8Eroğlu F, Koltas IS, Genc A. Identification of causative species in cutaneous leishmaniasis patients using PCR-RFLP. J Bacteriol Parasitol 2011;2:113.
9Harman M. Kutanöz leishmaniasis. Turkiye Klinikleri J Dermatol-Special Topics 2017;10:125-32.
10Serin MS, Daglioglu K, Bagirova M, et al. Rapid diagnosis and genotyping of Leishmania isolates from cutaneous and visceral leishmaniasis by microcapillary cultivation and polymerase chain reaction-restriction fragment length polymorphism of miniexon region. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis 2005;53:209-14.
11Özbilgin A, Çulha G, Uzun S, et al. Leishmaniasis in Turkey: first clinical isolation of Leishmania major from 18 autochthonous cases of cutaneous leishmaniasis in four geographical regions. Trop Med Int Health 2016;21:783-91.
12Harman M. Kutanöz Leishmaniasis. Turk J Dermatol 2015;9:168-76.
13Koltas IS, Eroglu F, Uzun S, et al. A comparative analysis of different molecular targets using PCR for diagnosis of old world leishmaniasis. Exp Parasitol 2016;164:43-8.
14Koltas IS, Eroglu F, Alabaz D, et al. The emergence of Leishmania major and Leishmania donovani in southern Turkey. Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg 2014;108:154-8.
15Başsorgun Cİ, Ünal B, Karakaş AA, et al. Clinicopathological evaluation of cutaneous leishmaniasis in the mediterranean region of Turkey. Turk Patoloji Derg 2015;31:126-30.
16Eroglu F, Koltas IS, Alabaz D, et al. Clinical manifestations and genetic variation of Leishmania infantum and Leishmania tropica in Southern Turkey. Exp Parasitol 2015;154:67-74.
17Graça GC, Volpini AC, Romero GA, et al. Development and validation of PCR-based assays for diagnosis of American cutaneous leishmaniasis and identification of the parasite species. Mem Inst Oswaldo Cruz 2012;107:664-74.
18Azmi K, Nasereddin A, Ereqat S, et al. Methods incorporatinga polymerase chain reaction and restriction fragment length polymorphism and their use as a’gold standard’ in diagnosing Old World cutaneous leishmaniasis. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis 2011;71:151-5.
19Dar NR, Khurshid T. Comparison of skin smears and biopsy specimens for demonstration of leishmania tropica bodies in cutaneous Leishmaniasis. J Coll Physicians Surg Pak 2005;15:765-67.
20Aviles H, Belli A, Armijos R, et al. PCR detection and identification of Leishmania parsites in clinical specimens in ecuador: a comparison with classical diagnostic methods. J Parasitol 1999;85:181-7.
21Rodriguez N, Guzman B, Rodas A, et al. Diagnosis of cutaneous leishmaniasis and species discrimination of parasites by PCR and hybridization. J Clin Microbiol 1994;32:2246-52.
22Tareen A, Afaq S, Haque AU. Comparative study of the diagnosis of cutaneous leishmaniasis by slit skin smear and skin biopsy for histopathology. JRMC 2014;18:83-6.
23Gurel MS, Ulukanligil M, Ozbilge H. Cutaneous leishmaniasis in Sanliurfa:epidemiologic and clinical features of the last four years (1997-2000). Int J Dermatol 2002;41:32-7.
24el-Safi SH, Peters W, el-Toam B, et al. Studies on the leishmaniases in the Sudan. 2. Clinical and parasitological studies on cutaneous leishmaniasis. Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg 1991;85:457-64.
25Uzun S, Uslular C, Yucel A, et al. Cutaneous leishmaniasis: evaluation of 3,074 cases in the Cukurova region of Turkey. Br J Dermatol 1999;140:347-50.
26Sharquie KE, Hassen AS, Hassan SA, et al. Evaluation of diagnosis of cutaneous leishmaniasis by direct smear, culture and histopathology. Saudi Med J 2002;23:925-8.
Article is only available in PDF format. Show PDF
2024 ©️ Galenos Publishing House