Discrepancies and consequences of indirect hemagglutination, indirect immunofluorescence and Elisa tests for the diagnosis of Chagas disease

Abstract

Using the indirect hemagglutination (IH), indirect immunofluorescence (IIF) and enzyme linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) tests for the diagnosis of Chagas disease, 4000 serum samples were examined. This study was conducted with different purposes: clinical interest, research support and parasitological monitoring of those patients with Chagas disease who were treated with heart transplantations. The tests occurred without patient selection and in accordance with the medical requests. The results showed discrepancies and brought about several questions, considering the different results that all three methods showed when considered together. What was found brought about concerns and we suggest the adoption of different measures, aiming to avoid these mismatches in the context of this disease.Com as provas de hemaglutinação indireta (HI), imunofluorescência indireta (IFI) e Enzyme Linked Immunosorbent Assay (ELISA), para diagnóstico da doença de Chagas, foram examinadas concomitantemente 4000 amostras de soro, com diferentes finalidades, tais como interesse clínico, apoio a pesquisas e acompanhamento parasitológico de pacientes com tal moléstia tratados por meio de transplante de coração. Os testes ocorreram, sem seleção e conforme as solicitações, em Laboratório que essencialmente prestou colaboração. Os resultados mostraram discordâncias, inclusive motivadoras de dúvidas, considerando especificamente o revelado pelos três métodos em conjunto. O que ficou verificado suscita preocupações e sugere a adoção de medidas aptas a evitar essas inadequações no contexto da parasitose.