Comparison of selected diagnostic methods for identification of Cryptosporidium parvum and Cryptosporidium andersoni in routine examination of faeces.

This study involved the comparison of suitability of different methods for routine diagnostics of Cryptosporidium spp. Two staining methods, one concentration-sedimentation method, seven concentration-floatation methods and one combined floatation-sedimentation method were compared. The methods were tested with two concentrations (1 x 10(5) and 1 x 10(6)/g) of C. parvum and C. andersoni. The methods were evaluated using light microscope, magnification 400x for concentration methods and 1000x for stained samples respectively. Specificity of both staining methods was 95-100%. Ziehl-Neelsen with P < 0.01 is more suitable for identification of C. andersoni and modified Milácek-Vítovec with P < 0.01 for identification of C. parvum. Concerning specificity and sensitivity, the floatation-concentration method by Sheather was found to provide the best results of all selected methods. The merthiolate iodine formaldehyde concentration (MIFC) method was the least specific one. The least suitable method concerning sensitivity and costs was the floatation method with caesium chloride (CsCl) with a specificity of 29%.

Monitoring of Cryptosporidium and Giardia in Czech drinking water sources.

In Czech raw water sources for drinking water supply, Cryptosporidium was found in numbers from 0 to 7400 per 100 liters and Giardia from 0 to 485 per 100 liters. The summer floods of 1997 probably brought the highest numbers of Cryptosporidium oocysts into one of the reservoirs sampled; since then these numbers decreased steadily. A relatively high number of Cryptosporidium oocysts was found in one sample of treated water. Repeated sampling demonstrated that this was a sporadic event. The reason for the presence of Cryptosporidium in a sample of treated drinking-water is unclear and requires further study.