Search

Conventional understanding suggests that simultaneous infection with more than one species of Leishmania is unlikely. In Peru, co-infections are clinically relevant because causative species dictates prognosis, treatment response, and follow-up. We describe a case of Leishmania (Viannia) braziliensis and L. (V.) lainsoni co-infection in a Peruvian patient with cutaneous leishmaniasis.

We hypothesized that Leishmania kDNA may be present in urine of patients with cutaneous leishmaniasis (CL). Urine samples and standard diagnostic specimens were collected from patients with skin lesions. kDNA polymerase chain reaction (PCR) was performed on samples from patients and 10 healthy volunteers from non-endemic areas. Eighty-six of 108 patients were diagnosed with CL and 18 (21%) had detectable Leishmania Viannia kDNA in the urine. Sensitivity and specificity were 20.9% (95% confidence interval [CI] 12.3-29.5%) and 100%. Six of 8 patients with mucocutaneous involvement had detectable kDNA in urine versus 12 of 78 patients with isolated cutaneous disease (P < 0.001). L. (V.) braziliensis (N = 3), L. (V.) guyanensis (N = 6), and L. (V.) peruviana (N = 3) were identified from urine. No healthy volunteer or patient with an alternate diagnosis had detectable kDNA in urine. Sensitivity of urine PCR is sub-optimal for diagnosis. On the basis of these preliminary data in a small number of patients, detectable kDNA in urine may identify less localized forms of infection and inform treatment decisions.

We evaluated performance characteristics of five diagnostic methods for cutaneous leishmaniasis. Patients who came to the Leishmania Clinic of Hospital Nacional Cayetano Heredia in Lima, Peru, were enrolled in the study. Lesion smears, culture, microculture, polymerase chain reaction (PCR), and leishmanin skin test (LST) were performed. A total of 145 patients with 202 lesions were enrolled: 114 patients with 161 lesions fulfilled criteria for cutaneous leishmaniasis. Sensitivity and specificity were 57.8% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 50.2-65.4%) and 100.0% for culture, 78.3% (95% CI = 71.9-84.7%) and 100.0% for microculture, 71.4% (95% CI = 64.4-78.4%) and 100.0% for smears, 78.2% (95% CI = 70.6-85.8%) and 77.4% (95% CI = 62.7-92.1%) for LST, and 96.9% (95% CI = 94.2-99.6%) and 65.9% (95% CI = 51.4-80.4%) for PCR. PCR was more sensitive than the other assays (P < 0.001). Sensitivities of culture, smears, and LST varied by lesion duration and appearance. PCR offers performance advantages over other assays, irrespective of patient age, sex, lesion duration, or appearance. That clinical factors influence performance of non-molecular assays offers clinicians a patient-focused approach to diagnostic test selection.