{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.025328330206378986, 'fraction_numerical': 0.006566604127579738, 'mean_word_length': 5.239766081871345, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Screening methods in alveolar echinococcosis: a follow-up study comparing Emc- and Emf-ELISA with Em2plus-ELISA and ultrasonography

SUMMARY The purpose of the present study was to identify Echinococcus multilocularis infection in follow-up of 95 subjects initially seropostive by Emc-ELISA or Emf-ELISA antibody assays and to compare the utility of these assays with specific Em2plus-ELISA and ultrasound screening for E. multilocularis infection. At follow-up seven subjects were seropositive with both methods, while three were seropositive only with Emc-ELISA and 11 only with Emf-ELISA. All subjects were seronegative with Em2plus-ELISA. There were no manifestations of E. multilocularis infestation by ultrasonographic screening. Seropositivity on Emc-ELISA and Emf-ELISA screening tests does not appear to correlate with manifest alveolar echinococcosis identified by ultrasound. A recommendation for further follow-up of subjects found to be seropositive with Emc-ELISA and Emf-ELISA but with no sonographic evidence of disease is not justified at this time.