ABSTRACT
Cutaneous leishmaniasis (CL) is endemic in Sri Lanka. Giemsa-stained slit-skin-smears (SSS-Giemsa) and histology are routinely used in diagnosis with a sensitivity of 40–70%. PCR currently has limited accessibility. Therefore, we assessed the sensitivity and specificity of a previously described fluorescence in situ hybridization assay, on skin smears and biopsy samples to overcome the limitations encountered with routine diagnostic methods.
Samples from a total of 123 suspected CL patients were collected and subjected to SSS-Giemsa, fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) on slit skin smears (SSS-FISH), formalin-fixed-paraffin-embedded-tissues stained with Hematoxylin & Eosin staining (FFPE-H&E) and FISH on formalin-fixed-paraffin-embedded-tissues (FFPE-FISH). Negative controls of 61 patient samples were collected from a CL non-endemic area and subjected to the same procedures. The gold standard PCR was used as a comparator. For FISH, two previously described cyanine 3 tagged Leihsmania genus-specific probes were used.
Compared to PCR, SSS-Giemsa, SSS-FISH, FFPE-H&E, and FFPE-FISH had sensitivities of 76.5%, 79.1%, 50.4% and 80.9%, respectively. Routine diagnostic tests (SSS-Giemsa and FFPE-H&E) had a specificity of 100%. SSS-FISH and FFPE-FISH had specificities of 96.7% and 93.4%, respectively. FFPE-FISH had a statistically significant higher diagnostic performance than FFPE-H&E (p < 0.001). The relative performance of SSS-Giemsa, SSS-FISH and FFPE-FISH was similar (p > 0.05 for all comparisons).
We conclude that FFPE-FISH is a more accurate diagnostic tool than FFPE–H&E. SSS-FISH did not have an additional advantage over SSS-Giemsa in diagnosis. However, SSS-FISH could be recommended as a minimally invasive method in studies assessing wound healing where immunological probes are used.
Acknowledgments
Ms. Hansika Kaushalya, Technical Officer of the Department of Parasitology, Faculty of Medical Sciences, University of Sri Jayewardenepura, Gangodawila, Nugegoda, Sri Lanka, for assisting in the field on sample collection.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.