TABLE 1.

Comparison of four diagnostic methods for the 15 patients with microsporidia detected by stained smears of stool samples^a

Case no.	Sexc	Age (yr)	HIV status	No. of CD4/mm3	Stool sample results by:
					Light microscopyb		PCRd		TEM	IFAT
					Small	Large	E. bieneusi	E. intestinalis		3B82H2	6E52D9
1	M	30	+	44	N		+	−	ND	+	+
2	M	16	−	737	VN		+	−	E. bieneusi	+	+
3	M	52	+	0	R		+	−	E. bieneusi	+	+
4	M	42	+	119	F		+	−	E. bieneusi	+	+
5	F	26	+	13	N		+	−	E. bieneusi	+	+
6	M	38	+	35	N		+	−	ND	+	+
7	M	39	+	23	R		+	−	ND	+	+
8	M	29	+	10	N		+	−	E. bieneusi	+	+
9	F	35	+	3	VN		+	−	E. bieneusi	+	+
10	M	39	+	41		R	−	+	E. intestinalis	−	−
11	M	49	+	20	N		+	−	ND	+	+
12	M	50	−	ND	N		+	−	ND	+	+
13	M	52	+	6	N		+	−	E. bieneusi	+	+
14	M	45	+	40	F		+	−	ND	+	+
15	M	34	+	15	VN		+	−	ND	+	+

^a+, positive; −, negative; ND, not done. 

^bUvitex 2B stain and Weber's modified trichrome stain were performed for all patients. Spores were classified as either small (diameter, 1 to 1.5 μm) or large (diameter, 1.2 to 2.2 μm). Classification of spore quantity per microscopic field (magnification, ×1,000; oil immersion): VN, very numerous; N, numerous; F, few; R, rare. 

^cM, male; F, female. 

^dSpecific PCR assay for direct detection of intestinal microsporidia.