Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
This study examined circulating filarial antigen by monoclonal antibody Og4C3-enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) from 114 men with hydrocele, living in an endemic area. Nocturnal blood and hydrocele fluid were collected and examined for microfilaria. ELISA was performed on serum and hydrocele fluid for detection of antigen. Amongst 114 cases, 5(4.4%) showed microfilaria in blood but none in fluid. ELISA was positive in 13(11.40%) serum and 5 (4.4%) fluid samples. All five fluid antigen positive cases were positive for antibodies and showed microfilaria in blood. These findings emphasize the use of circulating filarial antigen detection and alternative usage of hydrocele fluid for diagnosis of filariasis.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0255-0857.34769 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!