Since 2004, ELISA IgM and SAT have been routinely used in our laboratory for the diagnosis of human leptospirosis (
5). Although the sensitivity of serological tests increases in the second week of the illness (
2), serological methods are still being used due to their facility, sensitivity, and availability (
4). SAT and ELISA IgM seem to be superior at the acute phase to MAT as the reference serological method (
2,
4), and they are suggested for the diagnosis of leptospirosis (
2,
18). PCR has more sensitivity in the first days of illness due to its ability to detect 2 - 20 genomics of leptospires from sera and 10 genomics from urine (
11,
16). However, low positivity during the course of the disease was observed (
11,
18-
20).
In Morocco, MAT is suggested for the diagnosis (
21); however, the test is not available in Morocco and it is conducted in the Pasteur Institute of Paris (
21). Real-time PCR was reported in animal leptospirosis in one study (
22). The laboratory of Bacteriology at the National Institute of Hygiene in Rabat is the first laboratory in Morocco that has the ability to conduct real-time PCR for human leptospirosis.
The positivity of SAT and ELISA IgM for all 67 sera was 48 (71.6%) and 39 (58.2%), respectively. In the case of the unavailability of the reference serology test (MAT), ELISA IgM and SAT can detect leptospirosis at the acute and convalescent stages, with high sensitivity as reported (
2,
4,
19,
23,
24). Therefore, we suggest that patients who had negative results by ELISA IgM and SAT might have not leptospirosis.
De Abreu Fonseca et al. indicated that SAT and ELISA IgM had adequate sensitivity at the acute phase and that SAT could detect
leptospira antibodies earlier that ELISA IgM (
18). Brandao et al. reported that the positivity of SAT, ELISA IgM, and MAT at the acute phase was 57%, 53%, and 34%, respectively; however, the positivity reached 99% in all tests from the 15th day of the illness (
2).
ELISA IgG had the lowest positivity (5.88%) among others including SAT (88.24%), ELISA IgM (58.82%), and real-time PCR (8.33%). The low positivity of ELISA IgG might be due to that sampling was done before the development of IgG antibodies. Cumberland et al. reported that IgG antibodies appeared after IgM, and maximum titers of IgG can be detected at the convalescent phase of the illness (
25).
In our study, of 36 sera subjected to qPCR, only three sera had positive results. A lower positivity was observed in qPCR compared to ELISA IgM and SAT. Although the date of sampling was not reported by clinicians, sera that were negative by qPCR and positive by ELISA IgM and SAT might be due to the late sampling conducted after leptospires were cleared from the blood. Perwez et al. reported that PCR was superior in the first week of illness to ELISA IgM, but a low positivity was observed from the 8th day, and during 13 - 15 days, ELISA IgM was superior to PCR (
24).
De Abreu Fonseca et al. compared PCR with ELISA IgM, and reported that ELISA IgM had more sensitivity; however, PCR was most sensitive in initial sera samples presenting no specific antibodies detectable by any of the serological methods tested (
18). Therefore, it was suggested that the positivity of the diagnosis increased when PCR was used with serological tests (
18,
23).
In addition to late sampling, several reasons may lead to low positivity in PCR, such as substances (e.g. urea, creatinine, and hemoglobin derivates) that may inhibit DNA amplification with
leptospiral primers (
18). Moreover, other possible reasons include the absence of the organisms in the blood (
26), the microbial counts of about five cells that were too low to be detected (
20,
26), and degradation of DNA due to prolonged sample storage and several sample thawing (
26,
27).
Moreover, using the serum for the diagnosis may lead to less positivity. Kositanont et al. observed that the positive rate for DNA detection was higher in buffy coat (peripheral white blood cells) than in plasma and serum (
28). Stoddard et al. also indicated the same findings (
11). For this reason, serum seems to be a non-optimal specimen for real-time PCR (
11); however, serum gave high positivity than whole-blood (
20,
27).
Our findings revealed that males had higher rates of leptospirosis than females, which may be due to the occupation factor (
1,
19). The majority of cases were observed in Sidi Qacem region, followed by Meknes. The high incidence in Sidi Qacem was indicated earlier (
5,
14), and high incidences in the Meknes region was related to an outbreak occurred in 2004 as reported previously (
5,
29).
Due to the limitations of resources, we could not perform blood cultures on patient’s samples and MAT; therefore, we were unable to assess the sensitivity of the tests used in this study. Other limitations should be recognized such as unavailability of the time of sampling, second sample , and infecting serovars . We recommend conducting the diagnosis from buffy coat and urine specimens. Urine is a useful sample for testing of leptospirosis because the bacteria are present in the blood only in about the first week after the onset of symptoms, but they can be detected in the urine for several weeks (
1). Moreover, multiplex PCR (mPCR) should be considered when it is available; the use of two sets of primers in mPCR can increase the sensitivity and specificity of the test (
30).
5.1. Conclusions
Our study agrees with other studies that PCR is not useful for the diagnosis during the course of leptospirosis, and ELISA IgG cannot be used for early diagnosis. ELISA IgM and SAT are useful and rapid and do not need highly experienced labor; moreover, they are available in low-income countries and in less-equipped laboratories, and seem to be useful for the diagnosis of human leptospirosis.