Prevalence of amebiasis in inflammatory bowel disease in Turkey

Table 1 Number and methods for determination of E. histolytica determined in cases with IBD diagnosis and control group

	Wet mount ±Lugol’s iodinestaining	Modified formol ethylacetate	Trichrome stainingmethod	Total (none of parasite/patient)
Ulcerative colitis	5*(%3.84)	8*(%6.15)	13*(%10.0)	13/130
Crohn’s disease	-	1*(%3.33)	1*(%3.33)	1/30
Control group	1*(%0.95)	2*(%1.90)	2*(%1.90)	2/105

^* The parasite was determined by more than one method (+).

Table 2 Comparison of wet mount+Lugol’s iodine, modi-fied formol ethyl acetate methods with trichrome staining method

	Modified formol ethyl acetate (%)	Wet mount+Lugol’s iodine staining (%)
Sensitivity	64	36
Specificity	99	98
False negatives	36	64
False positives	0.1	0.1
Positive predictive value	90	63
Negative predictive value	97	95
Rate of accuracy	97	93