Abstract

Aims: To assess different laboratory methods for the identification of Entamoeba histolytica in clinical samples.

Methods: Antigen detection enzyme linked immunosorbent assay, polymerase chain reaction solution hybridisation enzyme linked immunoassay (PCR-SHELA), and a commercial Lightcycler PCR were compared using 101 stool and pus samples.

Results: Fifteen of the 101 samples were positive for E histolytica by one or more method. There were discrepancies between the results in five of these 15 samples when the assays were compared.

Conclusions: All three methods performed adequately, so that the choice of assay will depend on each individual laboratory’s budget and projected turnaround time.