The very low prevalence rate for cryptosporidiosis among humans and the relatively high prevalence among livestock in Hamadan region has been described recently (
9,
10). The present study showed a low prevalence in the similar population by fecal Ag-detection ELISA and the AP staining methods, which are suggested to be more sensitive diagnostic methods compared to the conventional, commonly used, modified Ziehl-Neelsen staining method. The results of the present study, and of several other researches, indicate that the ELISA method illustrates higher positive results than conventional staining methods, which is probably responsible to the reported superior accuracy of the method (
8,
11-
13). However, controversial results have been published as well (
14,
15). Even the AP staining method itself, which was considered more sensitive than modified Ziehl-Neelsen staining method (
3), showed less positives compared to ELISA.
Cryptosporidium spp. oocysts were detected in only three samples with the AP staining method, while ELISA revealed eight positives.
As our results show, the ELISA has a good performance in low prevalence and, probably, in low oocyst excretion. The method is suitable for epidemiological studies, because it is rapid and easy to perform, while on the other side of the coin, it is not cost-effective. Although our study revealed the superior positivity of the ELISA method compared to AP staining, however, this was not significant (P = 0.062). Nevertheless, if we compare the two results, it becomes obvious that the higher prevalence observed in ELISA would show infection status probably close to its real prevalence in the society, in comparison to other less sensitive conventional methods.
Numbers of other similar studies, performed worldwide, are reviewed below. Rosenblatt et al. 1993 (
12) evaluated the fecal Ag-detection ELISA and reported high sensitivity (93%) and specificity (99%) for it. They declare that ELISA is rapid, easy, and represents an accurate method for the diagnosis of
Cryptosporidium infection. On the basis of their report, it can be concluded that staining methods, even highly sensitive microscopic methods, such as the AP staining method (
3), cannot show the real epidemiological status of the infection. Our results showed the infection rate to be 3.5% (ELISA), which is higher than that observed by AP staining (1.3%). According to the results of the present study, the AP staining method possesses low sensitivity compared to the Ag-detection ELISA as a standard, and, if used for epidemiological studies, the results would not appear to be reliable.
Brook et al. 2008 (
16) evaluated three tests, including modified Ziehl-Neelsen, AP staining and enzyme immunoassay methods for the diagnosis of
Cryptosporidium infection. They express the idea that all the three methods are effective in diagnosing the infection in frozen and fresh cattle fecal specimens. In contrast, our findings illustrated a difference in the results of the two experimented methods, although the difference was not significant. Given the fact that our
P value was close to valid statistical significance, a larger sample size would most probably reveal a significant difference.
In another similar study, Khurana et al. 2012 (
14) evaluated modified Ziehl-Neelsen staining, AP staining, Ag-detection ELISA and molecular methods, for the diagnosis of cryptosporidiosis revealing sensitivities of 79.06%, 100%, 95.35% and 100%, respectively. In contrast to our results, in their study, the AP staining method showed higher positives than ELISA. They suggested that the AP method is a suitable method, because in their study it was highly sensitive and specific, simple, rapid and less costly or time consuming. However, our results show lower sensitivity for the AP staining method compared to Ag-detection ELISA as a golden standard in epidemiological studies with low prevalence status.
As far as authors’ knowledge, in the Iranian literature only one similar study has been performed by Dorostkar-Moghadam et al. 2004 (
17) that evaluated the Enzyme Immunoassay (EIA) for the diagnosis of the
Cryptosporidium infection compared to the modified Ziehl-Neelsen staining method confirmed by immunofluorescence assay. They concluded that, EIA is a sensitive, specific and simple method for the diagnosis of cryptosporidiosis. For epidemiological studies, especially on asymptomatic individuals from low-prevalence areas, Ag-detection ELISA may help to obtain an accurate prevalence rate or very close to statistical accuracy. Although it is easy to perform and rapid, but it is not cost-effective, especially in the case of large scaled studies.
Cryptosporidium infection rate is very low in Hamadan region (
18) and, consequently, a larger sample size and increased budgets are needed to validate the results in larger studies. The insufficient funding for sampling and purchasing the ELISA kits was our main limitation in this study. For the epidemiological studies on the
Cryptosporidium infection, especially on asymptomatic individuals in low prevalence regions, the Ag-detection ELISA method would reveal an accurate infection rate compared with conventional microscopic methods.