Evaluation of Serodiagnostic Tests for Visceral Larva Migrans

Lawrence Glickman Diagnostic Laboratory, New York State College of Veterinary Medicine, Cornell University, Parasitic Disease Division, Bureau of Epidemiology, Center for Disease Control, Public Health Service, Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Ithaca, New York 14853

Search for other papers by Lawrence Glickman in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Peter Schantz Diagnostic Laboratory, New York State College of Veterinary Medicine, Cornell University, Parasitic Disease Division, Bureau of Epidemiology, Center for Disease Control, Public Health Service, Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Ithaca, New York 14853

Search for other papers by Peter Schantz in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Rebecca Dombroske Diagnostic Laboratory, New York State College of Veterinary Medicine, Cornell University, Parasitic Disease Division, Bureau of Epidemiology, Center for Disease Control, Public Health Service, Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Ithaca, New York 14853

Search for other papers by Rebecca Dombroske in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
, and
Raymond Cypess Diagnostic Laboratory, New York State College of Veterinary Medicine, Cornell University, Parasitic Disease Division, Bureau of Epidemiology, Center for Disease Control, Public Health Service, Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Ithaca, New York 14853

Search for other papers by Raymond Cypess in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
Restricted access

Four serologic techniques for the diagnosis of visceral larva migrans caused by Toxocara canis, namely indirect hemagglutination (IHA), bentonite flocculation (BF), enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), and double diffusion in agar (Ouchterlony), were evaluated using sera sent to the Center for Disease Control from patients with a presumptive diagnosis of visceral larva migrans (VLM). Patients having 5–6 of the clinical or laboratory criteria for VLM were designated as cases while those with 0–2 criteria served as controls. The sensitivity of the ELISA was 78.3% compared to 18.2%, 25.8%, and 65.2% for the IHA, BF, and Ouchterlony, respectively; the specificity of all four tests was greater than 92%. The predictive value of a positive test was greater than 85% for all tests except the IHA, while the predictive value of a negative test was greater than 85% only for the ELISA. The results of the ELISA were reproducible in different laboratories. Based on these findings, the ELISA using a larval antigen appears to be the serodiagnostic method of choice for VLM.

Author Notes

Save