1921
Volume 100, Issue 6
  • ISSN: 0002-9637
  • E-ISSN: 1476-1645

Abstract

Abstract.

Brucellosis is an important but neglected zoonosis that causes serious economic losses both in livestock and human populations. The aim of the present study was to estimate the true prevalence of brucellosis together with diagnostic sensitivity and specificity of three serological tests in humans of the northwestern part of Ecuador using a Bayesian approach adjusted for the dependencies among the multiple tests to avoid any misinterpretation. In addition, the causal agent responsible for human brucellosis was also identified. Using a total of 3,733 samples collected from humans in this area between 2006 and 2008, the prevalence of human brucellosis and the diagnostic test characteristics of the Rose Bengal fast agglutination test (RBT), Wright’s slow agglutination test with ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid disodium salt dehydrate (EDTA) (SAT-EDTA), and indirect ELISA (iELISA) were estimated using a Bayesian approach. The estimated true prevalence of human brucellosis was 1% (credibility interval: 0.4–1.6). The sensitivities of iELISA and RBT were higher than and similar (95.1% and 95.0%, respectively) to those of SAT-EDTA (60.8%). Even though all tests indicated a high specificity (> 99.0%), the specificity of SAT-EDTA was highest (99.9%). The circulating strain in this study area was identified to be biotype 4 based on culture and microbiological characterization. The RBT and the iELISA are recommended for estimating the true prevalence of human brucellosis and/or for surveillance programs following their high sensitivities and specificities. The proposed strategy supports evidence-based medicine for clinicians and policy-makers to ensure appropriate preventive and control program of brucellosis worldwide.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

The graphs shown below represent data from March 2017
/content/journals/10.4269/ajtmh.18-0622
2019-04-29
2020-09-23
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/14761645/100/6/tpmd180622.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.4269/ajtmh.18-0622&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Young EJ, 1997. Especies de brucella. Mandell G, Bennett J, Dolin R, eds. Enfermedades Infecciosas, Principios y Practica. Buenos Aires, Argentina: Editorial Medica Paramericana SA, 23002320.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Orduña A et al., 2000. Evaluation of an immunocapture-agglutination test (Brucellacapt) for serodiagnosis of human brucellosis. J Clin Microbiol 38: 40004005.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Saegerman C, Berkvens D, Godfroid J, Walravens K, 2010. Bovine brucellosis. Lefèvre P, Blancou J, Chermette R, Uilenberg G, eds. Infectious and Parasitic Disease of Livestock. Cachan, France: Lavoisier, 9911021.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Corbel MJ, 2006. Brucellosis in Humans and Animals. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Torres H, 2008. Control de Brucelosis bovina—programa nacional. Minist Agric Ganad Acuacultura y Pesca (MAGAP), Serv Ecuatoriano Saniadad Agropecu (SESA) Ed. Quito, Ecuador, 30.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Bowden R, 1996. Temas de Microbiología Veterinaria. Stanchi B, Martino P, Gentilini E, Reinoso E, eds. Inter-Medica, Buenos Aires, Argentina: Sur. Primera, 159175.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Saegerman C, Berkvens D, Godforid J, Walravens K, 2010. Chapter 77: bovine brucellosis. Infectious and Parasitic Disease of Livestock. Paris, France: Lavoisier et Commonwealth Agricultural Bureau – International, 9911011.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Sarguna P, Bilolikar AK, Rao A, Mathur DR, 2002. Brucellosis in association with HIV infection–a case report. Indian J Med Microbiol 20: 221222.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Doganay M, Aygen B, 2003. Human brucellosis: an overview. Int J Infect Dis 7: 173182.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Díaz R, Leiva J, Rubio M, Dorronsoro L, 2001. Diagnóstico de la brucelosis humana. Díaz E, Hernández L, Valero G, Arellano B, eds. Diagnóstico de Brucelosis Animal. México: INIFAP, 198212.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. INEC, 2008. Anuario de estadísticas hospitalarias. Informe Analítico. Quito, Ecuador: INEC, 92.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Saegerman C et al., 2004. Evaluation of three serum i-ELISAs using monoclonal antibodies and protein G as peroxidase conjugate for the diagnosis of bovine brucellosis. Vet Microbiol 100: 91105.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Sanogo M, Thys E, Achi YL, Fretin D, Michel P, Abatih E, Berkvens D, Saegerman C, 2013. Bayesian estimation of the true prevalence, sensitivity and specificity of the Rose Bengal and indirect ELISA tests in the diagnosis of bovine brucellosis. Vet J 195: 114120.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Dendukuri N, Joseph L, 2001. Bayesian approaches to modeling the conditional dependence between multiple diagnostic tests. Biometrics 57: 158167.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Branscum AJ, Gardner IA, Wagner BA, McInturff PS, Salman MD, 2005. Effect of diagnostic testing error on intracluster correlation coefficient estimation. Prev Vet Med 69: 6375.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Berkvens D, Speybroeck N, Praet N, Adel A, Lesaffre E, 2006. Estimating disease prevalence in a Bayesian framework using probabilistic constraints. Epidemiology 17: 145153.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Vacek PM, 1985. The effect of conditional dependence on the evaluation of diagnostic tests. Biometrics 41: 959968.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Godfroid J, Boelaert F, 1995. Prescriptions Pour le Diagnostic Sérologique de la Brucellose. Uccle, Belgium: CODA-CERVA, 47.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Baily GC, Kraahn JB, Drasar BS, Stokeer NG, 1992. Detection of Brucella melitensis and Brucella abortus by DNA amplification. J Trop Med Hyg 95: 271275.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Navarro E, Escribano J, Fernández JA, Solera J, 2002. Comparison of three different PCR methods for detection of Brucella spp. in human blood samples. FEMS Immunol Med Microbiol 34: 147151.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Bricker BJ, Halling SM, 1994. Differentiation of Brucella abortus bv. 1, 2, and 4, Brucella melitensis, Brucella ovis, and Brucella suis bv. 1 by PCR. J Clin Microbiol 32: 26602666.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Spiegelhalter DJ, Best NG, Carlin BP, van der Linde A, 2002. Bayesian measures of model complexity and fit. J R Stat Soc Ser B 64: 583639.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Nérette P, Stryhn H, Dohoo I, Hammell L, 2008. Using pseudogold standards and latent-class analysis in combination to evaluate the accuracy of three diagnostic tests. Prev Vet Med 85: 207225.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Kadri SM, Rukhsana A, Laharwal MA, Tanvir M, 2000. Seroprevalence of brucellosis in Kashmir (India) among patients with pyrexia of unknown origin. J Indian Med Assoc 98: 170171.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Araj GF, Azzam RA, 1996. Seroprevalence of brucella antibodies among persons in high-risk occupation in Lebanon. Epidemiol Infect 117: 281288.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Rahman AK, Dirk B, Fretin D, Saegerman C, Ahmed MU, Muhammad N, Hossain A, Abatih E, 2012. Seroprevalence and risk factors for brucellosis in a high-risk group of individuals in Bangladesh. Foodborne Pathog Dis 9: 190197.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Gómez MC, Nieto JA, Rosa C, Geijo P, Escribano MA, Muñoz A, López C, 2008. Evaluation of seven tests for diagnosis of human brucellosis in an area where the disease is endemic. Clin Vaccine Immunol 15: 10311033.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Memish ZA, Almuneef M, Mah MW, Qassem LA, Osoba AO, 2002. Comparison of the Brucella standard agglutination test with the ELISA IgG and IgM in patients with Brucella bacteremia. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis 44: 129132.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Gelman A, Rubin DB, 1992. Inference from iterative simulation using multiple sequences. Stat Sci 7: 457472.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Haley C, Wagner B, Puvanendiran S, Abrahante J, Murtaugh MP, 2011. Diagnostic performance measures of ELISA and quantitative PCR tests for porcine circovirus type 2 exposure using Bayesian latent class analysis. Prev Vet Med 101: 7988.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Praud A, Gimenez O, Zanella G, Dufour B, Pozzi N, Antras V, Meyer L, Garin-Bastuji B, 2012. Estimation of sensitivity and specificity of five serological tests for the diagnosis of porcine brucellosis. Prev Vet Med 104: 94100.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Enøe C, Georgiadis MP, Johnson WO, 2000. Estimation of sensitivity and specificity of diagnostic tests and disease prevalence when the true disease state is unknown. Prev Vet Med 45: 6181.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Robinson A, 2003. Guidelines for Coordinated Human and Animal Brucellosis Surveillance. Rome, Italy: FAO.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Ron-Roman L, Benitez W, Speybroeck N, Ron J, Saegerman C, Berkvens D, Abatih E, 2013. Spatio-temporal clusters of incident human brucellosis cases in Ecuador. Spat Spatiotemporal Epidemiol 5: 110.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Serra Alvarez J, Godoy García P, 2000. Incidence, etiology and epidemiology of brucellosis in a rural area of the province of Lleida [in Spanish]. Rev Esp Salud Publica 74: 4553.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Caraguel C, Stryhn H, Gagné N, Dohoo I, Hammell L, 2012. Use of a third class in latent class modelling for the diagnostic evaluation of five infectious salmon anaemia virus detection tests. Prev Vet Med 104: 165173.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Roux J, 1979. Epidemiology and prevention of brucellosis [in French]. Bull World Health Organ 57: 179194.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Pila-Pérez R, Pila-Peláez R, Paulino-Basulto M, Hernández-Pupo O, Gacía-Peña JG, del Sol-Torres G, 1997. Estudio clínico de la brucelosis humana. Rev Med Urug 13: 110117.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Hernández-Bastida A, García-Ramírez P, Cruz-Estrada A, Rojo J, 1999. Seroprevalencia de brucelosis en disponentes de sangre del Hospital General de México. Rev Médica Hosp Gen México 62: 107112.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Ron-Román J, Saegerman C, Minda-Aluisa E, Benítez-Ortíz W, Brandt J, Douce R, 2012. First report of orchitis in man caused by Brucella abortus biovar 1 in Ecuador. Am J Trop Med Hyg 87: 524528.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Pappas G, Papadimitriou P, Akritidis N, Christou L, Tsianos EV, 2006. The new global map of human brucellosis. Lancet Infect Dis 6: 9199.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.4269/ajtmh.18-0622
Loading
/content/journals/10.4269/ajtmh.18-0622
Loading

Data & Media loading...

Supplemental appendices

  • Received : 29 Jul 2018
  • Accepted : 10 Jan 2019
  • Published online : 29 Apr 2019
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error