Please wait a minute...
Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology  2019, Vol. 46 Issue (4): 593-595    DOI: 10.12891/ceog4585.2019
Original Research Previous articles | Next articles
Polymerase chain reaction analysis of amniotic fluid for diagnosis of fetal toxoplasmosis
F.M. Andrade1, E.F.M. Santana1, E. Araujo Júnior1*(), S.G.A. Andrade1, J. Bortoletti Filho1, A.M. Amed1, A.F. Moron1
1Department of Obstetrics, Paulista School of Medicine, São Paulo Federal University (EPM-UNIFESP), São Paulo, Brazil
Download:  PDF(295KB)  ( 184 ) Full text   ( 5 )
Export:  BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)      

Purpose: To assess the efficacy of the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) analysis of the amniotic fluid to diagnose fetal toxoplasmosis. Material and Methods: The PCR method was used to test amniotic fluid via the B1 primer for detecting T. gondii in pregnant women whose serology was positive for IgM. To validate the method, 84 pregnant women underwent amniocentesis and were followed-up for a period of six years. All the newborns were assessed using serology (IgM), transfontanellar ultrasound, and examination of the fundus. Results: The positive PCR rate for the etiologic agent of toxoplasmosis was 17.9% (15 patients) and the rate of newborns in contact with this agent was 16.7% (14 infants). Of these 14 infants, five manifested the disease, while nine only had contact with T. gondii with no signs of toxoplasmosis until hospital discharge. Of the five newborns with the disease, three were born to women who had a negative pre-natal PCR. The PCR method had a sensitivity of 78.6%, specificity of 94.3%, positive predictive value of 73.3%, and negative predictive value of 95.6%. Conclusion: The PCR method is effective in detecting congenital toxoplasmosis and leads us to question the efficacy of maternal serological status as a diagnostic marker.

Key words:  Polymerase chain reaction      Amniotic fluid      Toxoplasmosis     
Published:  10 August 2019     
*Corresponding Author(s):  E. ARAUJO JÚNIOR     E-mail:

Cite this article: 

F.M. Andrade, E.F.M. Santana, E. Araujo Júnior, S.G.A. Andrade, J. Bortoletti Filho, A.M. Amed, A.F. Moron. Polymerase chain reaction analysis of amniotic fluid for diagnosis of fetal toxoplasmosis. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2019, 46(4): 593-595.

URL:     OR

[1] Midori Fujisaki, Seishi Furukawa, Hiroshi Sameshima. Twin amniotic fluid discordance below 26 weeks of gestation for predicting adverse outcomes[J]. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2021, 48(1): 53-58.
[2] R. Suvannasarn, T. Tongsong, P. Jatavan. Amniotic fluid embolism: the pathophysiology, diagnostic clue, and blood biomarkers indicator for disease prediction[J]. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2020, 47(2): 159-165.
[3] R. Dias Nunes, E. Traebert, M. Seemann, J. Traebert. Evaluation of simple and low-cost diagnostic tests for premature rupture of membranes[J]. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2020, 47(2): 287-290.
[4] N. Cim, H.E. Tolunay, B. Boza, M. Bilici, E. Karaman, O. Cetin, R. Yildizhan, H.G. Sahin. Is there any association between fetal nervous system anomalies and heavy metal-trace element levels in amniotic fluid?[J]. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2018, 45(4): 555-557.
[5] Yi-Hua Zhou, Li-Hua Hu, Cha-Hua Huang, Hui-hui Bao, Xie-Fei Qi, Xiao-Shu Cheng. Infection caused by amniotic fluid embolism complicated with disseminated intravascular coagulation: a case report[J]. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2017, 44(6): 966-969.
[6] U. Indraccolo, R. Ventrone, G. Scutiero, P. Greco, S.R. Indraccolo. Interventions for treating amniotic fluid embolism: a systematic review with meta-analysis[J]. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2017, 44(5): 666-677.
[1] Eli M. Roth, Michael H. Davidson. PCSK9 Inhibitors: Mechanism of Action, Efficacy, and Safety[J]. Reviews in Cardiovascular Medicine, 2018, 19(S1): 31 -46 .
[2] Sandeep K. Krishnan, Norman E. Lepor. Acute and Chronic Cardiovascular Effects of Hyperkalemia: New Insights Into Prevention and Clinical Management[J]. Reviews in Cardiovascular Medicine, 2016, 17(S1): 9 -21 .
[3] Ibrahim Sidiqi, Patrick Alexander. Current Advances in Endovascular Therapy for Infrapopliteal Artery Disease[J]. Reviews in Cardiovascular Medicine, 2015, 16(1): 36 -50 .
[4] Peter Shalit. Management of Dyslipidemia in Patients With Human Immunodeficiency Virus[J]. Reviews in Cardiovascular Medicine, 2014, 15(S1): 38 -46 .
[5] Sophie Mavrogeni, Fabrizio Cantini, Gerald M. Pohost. Systemic Vasculitis: An Underestimated Cause of Heart Failure—Assessment by Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance[J]. Reviews in Cardiovascular Medicine, 2013, 14(1): 49 -55 .
[6] George L. Smith. Appropriate Use Criteria: The Gold Standard, or a Mechanism for the Derogation of Clinical Judgment?[J]. Reviews in Cardiovascular Medicine, 2011, 12(2): 105 .
[7] Prabhjot Singh Nijjar, Anoop Parameswaran, Aman M. Amanullah. Evaluation of Anomalous Aortic Origins of the Coronaries by 64-Slice Cardiac Computed Tomography[J]. Reviews in Cardiovascular Medicine, 2007, 8(3): 175 -181 .
[8] . SELF-ASSESSMENT POST-TEST[J]. Reviews in Cardiovascular Medicine, 2006, 7(S2): 51 -52 .
[9] Alice K. Jacobs. Gender Differences in Coronary Revascularization: Does Age Make a Difference?[J]. Reviews in Cardiovascular Medicine, 2004, 5(1): 68 -70 .
[10] Jeffrey W. Moses, Stephane Carlier, Issam Moussa. Lesion Preparation Prior to Stenting[J]. Reviews in Cardiovascular Medicine, 2004, 5(S2): 16 -21 .