Background and Objectives: In Iran, anaplasmosis is normally diagnosed with traditional Giemsa staining method. This is not applicable for identification of the carrier animals. The aim of this study was to compare the detection of Anaplasma marginale in two different numbers of microscopic fields (50 and 100) using conventional Giemsa staining method compared with the PCR-RFLP technique.
Materials and Methods: In this study, examinations were performed on 150 blood samples from cattle without clinical signs. Sensitivity and specificity of two microscopic fields (50 and 100 fields) were compared with A. marginale specific PCR-RFLP. The degree of agreement between PCR-RFLP and the two microscopic tests was determined by Kappa (κ) values with 95% confidence intervals.
Results: PCR-RFLP showed that 58 samples were A. marginale, while routine microscopy showed erythrocytes harboring Anaplasma like structures in 16 and 75 blood samples determined in 50 and 100 microscopic fields respectively. Examination of 50 and 100 microscopic fields showed 25.8% and 91.4% sensitivity and 99% and 76.1% specificity compared to 100% sensitivity and specificity by PCR-RFLP. The Kappa coefficient between PCR-RFLP and Microscopy (50 fields) indicated a fair level of agreement (0.29). The Kappa coefficient between PCR-RFLP and Microscopy (100 fields) indicated a good level of agreement (0.64)
Conclusion: Our results showed that the microscopic examination remains the convenient technique for day-to-day diagnosis of clinical cases in the laboratory but for the detection of carrier animal with low bacteremia, microscopy with 100 fields is preferable to Microscopy with 50 fields and molecular methods such as PCR-RFLP can be used as a safe method for identifying cattle persistently infected with A. marginale.