English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Serum antibody detection tests and a urine antigen detection technique were compared in samples from 116 patients epidemiologically characterized as belonging to a legionellosis outbreak. Sera were tested by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISAs) for immunoglobulin M (IgM) and IgG plus IgM and by immunofluorescent assays (IFAs) for IgG, IgM, IgA, and polyimmunoglobulin using commercial kits (Vircell); concentrated urines were tested with the Binax NOW Legionella test. ELISA for IgM, ELISA for IgG plus IgM, antigenuria detection, and IFA for IgM were able to diagnose 72.3%, 60.5%, 53.3%, and 51.4%, respectively, of patients. Antigenuria was present in 53.8% of first samples, ELISA detected IgM in 29.7%, ELISA detected IgG plus IgM in 7.9%, and IFA detected IgM in 3.9%. Ten antigenuria-negative first samples tested serologically positive, 9 of them to IgM by ELISA. Despite the single source of the samples included in the study, detection of IgM using a sensitive technique such as ELISA seems to be a suitable complement to antigenuria detection for the diagnosis of legionellosis.

Value of Serological Testing for Diagnosis of Legionellosis in Outbreak Patients