Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research, ISSN - 0973 - 709X

Users Online : 44407

AbstractMaterial and MethodsResultsDiscussionConclusionReferencesDOI and Others
Article in PDF How to Cite Citation Manager Readers' Comments (0) Audio Visual Article Statistics Link to PUBMED Print this Article Send to a Friend
Advertisers Access Statistics Resources

Dr Mohan Z Mani

"Thank you very much for having published my article in record time.I would like to compliment you and your entire staff for your promptness, courtesy, and willingness to be customer friendly, which is quite unusual.I was given your reference by a colleague in pathology,and was able to directly phone your editorial office for clarifications.I would particularly like to thank the publication managers and the Assistant Editor who were following up my article. I would also like to thank you for adjusting the money I paid initially into payment for my modified article,and refunding the balance.
I wish all success to your journal and look forward to sending you any suitable similar article in future"



Dr Mohan Z Mani,
Professor & Head,
Department of Dermatolgy,
Believers Church Medical College,
Thiruvalla, Kerala
On Sep 2018




Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar

"Over the last few years, we have published our research regularly in Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research. Having published in more than 20 high impact journals over the last five years including several high impact ones and reviewing articles for even more journals across my fields of interest, we value our published work in JCDR for their high standards in publishing scientific articles. The ease of submission, the rapid reviews in under a month, the high quality of their reviewers and keen attention to the final process of proofs and publication, ensure that there are no mistakes in the final article. We have been asked clarifications on several occasions and have been happy to provide them and it exemplifies the commitment to quality of the team at JCDR."



Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar
Head, Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad
Chairman, Research Group, Charutar Arogya Mandal, Karamsad
National Joint Coordinator - Advanced IAP NNF NRP Program
Ex-Member, Governing Body, National Neonatology Forum, New Delhi
Ex-President - National Neonatology Forum Gujarat State Chapter
Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad, Anand, Gujarat.
On Sep 2018




Dr. Kalyani R

"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research is at present a well-known Indian originated scientific journal which started with a humble beginning. I have been associated with this journal since many years. I appreciate the Editor, Dr. Hemant Jain, for his constant effort in bringing up this journal to the present status right from the scratch. The journal is multidisciplinary. It encourages in publishing the scientific articles from postgraduates and also the beginners who start their career. At the same time the journal also caters for the high quality articles from specialty and super-specialty researchers. Hence it provides a platform for the scientist and researchers to publish. The other aspect of it is, the readers get the information regarding the most recent developments in science which can be used for teaching, research, treating patients and to some extent take preventive measures against certain diseases. The journal is contributing immensely to the society at national and international level."



Dr Kalyani R
Professor and Head
Department of Pathology
Sri Devaraj Urs Medical College
Sri Devaraj Urs Academy of Higher Education and Research , Kolar, Karnataka
On Sep 2018




Dr. Saumya Navit

"As a peer-reviewed journal, the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research provides an opportunity to researchers, scientists and budding professionals to explore the developments in the field of medicine and dentistry and their varied specialities, thus extending our view on biological diversities of living species in relation to medicine.
‘Knowledge is treasure of a wise man.’ The free access of this journal provides an immense scope of learning for the both the old and the young in field of medicine and dentistry as well. The multidisciplinary nature of the journal makes it a better platform to absorb all that is being researched and developed. The publication process is systematic and professional. Online submission, publication and peer reviewing makes it a user-friendly journal.
As an experienced dentist and an academician, I proudly recommend this journal to the dental fraternity as a good quality open access platform for rapid communication of their cutting-edge research progress and discovery.
I wish JCDR a great success and I hope that journal will soar higher with the passing time."



Dr Saumya Navit
Professor and Head
Department of Pediatric Dentistry
Saraswati Dental College
Lucknow
On Sep 2018




Dr. Arunava Biswas

"My sincere attachment with JCDR as an author as well as reviewer is a learning experience . Their systematic approach in publication of article in various categories is really praiseworthy.
Their prompt and timely response to review's query and the manner in which they have set the reviewing process helps in extracting the best possible scientific writings for publication.
It's a honour and pride to be a part of the JCDR team. My very best wishes to JCDR and hope it will sparkle up above the sky as a high indexed journal in near future."



Dr. Arunava Biswas
MD, DM (Clinical Pharmacology)
Assistant Professor
Department of Pharmacology
Calcutta National Medical College & Hospital , Kolkata




Dr. C.S. Ramesh Babu
" Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a multi-specialty medical and dental journal publishing high quality research articles in almost all branches of medicine. The quality of printing of figures and tables is excellent and comparable to any International journal. An added advantage is nominal publication charges and monthly issue of the journal and more chances of an article being accepted for publication. Moreover being a multi-specialty journal an article concerning a particular specialty has a wider reach of readers of other related specialties also. As an author and reviewer for several years I find this Journal most suitable and highly recommend this Journal."
Best regards,
C.S. Ramesh Babu,
Associate Professor of Anatomy,
Muzaffarnagar Medical College,
Muzaffarnagar.
On Aug 2018




Dr. Arundhathi. S
"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a reputed peer reviewed journal and is constantly involved in publishing high quality research articles related to medicine. Its been a great pleasure to be associated with this esteemed journal as a reviewer and as an author for a couple of years. The editorial board consists of many dedicated and reputed experts as its members and they are doing an appreciable work in guiding budding researchers. JCDR is doing a commendable job in scientific research by promoting excellent quality research & review articles and case reports & series. The reviewers provide appropriate suggestions that improve the quality of articles. I strongly recommend my fraternity to encourage JCDR by contributing their valuable research work in this widely accepted, user friendly journal. I hope my collaboration with JCDR will continue for a long time".



Dr. Arundhathi. S
MBBS, MD (Pathology),
Sanjay Gandhi institute of trauma and orthopedics,
Bengaluru.
On Aug 2018




Dr. Mamta Gupta,
"It gives me great pleasure to be associated with JCDR, since last 2-3 years. Since then I have authored, co-authored and reviewed about 25 articles in JCDR. I thank JCDR for giving me an opportunity to improve my own skills as an author and a reviewer.
It 's a multispecialty journal, publishing high quality articles. It gives a platform to the authors to publish their research work which can be available for everyone across the globe to read. The best thing about JCDR is that the full articles of all medical specialties are available as pdf/html for reading free of cost or without institutional subscription, which is not there for other journals. For those who have problem in writing manuscript or do statistical work, JCDR comes for their rescue.
The journal has a monthly publication and the articles are published quite fast. In time compared to other journals. The on-line first publication is also a great advantage and facility to review one's own articles before going to print. The response to any query and permission if required, is quite fast; this is quite commendable. I have a very good experience about seeking quick permission for quoting a photograph (Fig.) from a JCDR article for my chapter authored in an E book. I never thought it would be so easy. No hassles.
Reviewing articles is no less a pain staking process and requires in depth perception, knowledge about the topic for review. It requires time and concentration, yet I enjoy doing it. The JCDR website especially for the reviewers is quite user friendly. My suggestions for improving the journal is, more strict review process, so that only high quality articles are published. I find a a good number of articles in Obst. Gynae, hence, a new journal for this specialty titled JCDR-OG can be started. May be a bimonthly or quarterly publication to begin with. Only selected articles should find a place in it.
An yearly reward for the best article authored can also incentivize the authors. Though the process of finding the best article will be not be very easy. I do not know how reviewing process can be improved. If an article is being reviewed by two reviewers, then opinion of one can be communicated to the other or the final opinion of the editor can be communicated to the reviewer if requested for. This will help one’s reviewing skills.
My best wishes to Dr. Hemant Jain and all the editorial staff of JCDR for their untiring efforts to bring out this journal. I strongly recommend medical fraternity to publish their valuable research work in this esteemed journal, JCDR".



Dr. Mamta Gupta
Consultant
(Ex HOD Obs &Gynae, Hindu Rao Hospital and associated NDMC Medical College, Delhi)
Aug 2018




Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey

"I wish to thank Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), for asking me to write up few words.
Writing is the representation of language in a textual medium i e; into the words and sentences on paper. Quality medical manuscript writing in particular, demands not only a high-quality research, but also requires accurate and concise communication of findings and conclusions, with adherence to particular journal guidelines. In medical field whether working in teaching, private, or in corporate institution, everyone wants to excel in his / her own field and get recognised by making manuscripts publication.


Authors are the souls of any journal, and deserve much respect. To publish a journal manuscripts are needed from authors. Authors have a great responsibility for producing facts of their work in terms of number and results truthfully and an individual honesty is expected from authors in this regards. Both ways its true "No authors-No manuscripts-No journals" and "No journals–No manuscripts–No authors". Reviewing a manuscript is also a very responsible and important task of any peer-reviewed journal and to be taken seriously. It needs knowledge on the subject, sincerity, honesty and determination. Although the process of reviewing a manuscript is a time consuming task butit is expected to give one's best remarks within the time frame of the journal.
Salient features of the JCDR: It is a biomedical, multidisciplinary (including all medical and dental specialities), e-journal, with wide scope and extensive author support. At the same time, a free text of manuscript is available in HTML and PDF format. There is fast growing authorship and readership with JCDR as this can be judged by the number of articles published in it i e; in Feb 2007 of its first issue, it contained 5 articles only, and now in its recent volume published in April 2011, it contained 67 manuscripts. This e-journal is fulfilling the commitments and objectives sincerely, (as stated by Editor-in-chief in his preface to first edition) i e; to encourage physicians through the internet, especially from the developing countries who witness a spectrum of disease and acquire a wealth of knowledge to publish their experiences to benefit the medical community in patients care. I also feel that many of us have work of substance, newer ideas, adequate clinical materials but poor in medical writing and hesitation to submit the work and need help. JCDR provides authors help in this regards.
Timely publication of journal: Publication of manuscripts and bringing out the issue in time is one of the positive aspects of JCDR and is possible with strong support team in terms of peer reviewers, proof reading, language check, computer operators, etc. This is one of the great reasons for authors to submit their work with JCDR. Another best part of JCDR is "Online first Publications" facilities available for the authors. This facility not only provides the prompt publications of the manuscripts but at the same time also early availability of the manuscripts for the readers.
Indexation and online availability: Indexation transforms the journal in some sense from its local ownership to the worldwide professional community and to the public.JCDR is indexed with Embase & EMbiology, Google Scholar, Index Copernicus, Chemical Abstracts Service, Journal seek Database, Indian Science Abstracts, to name few of them. Manuscriptspublished in JCDR are available on major search engines ie; google, yahoo, msn.
In the era of fast growing newer technologies, and in computer and internet friendly environment the manuscripts preparation, submission, review, revision, etc and all can be done and checked with a click from all corer of the world, at any time. Of course there is always a scope for improvement in every field and none is perfect. To progress, one needs to identify the areas of one's weakness and to strengthen them.
It is well said that "happy beginning is half done" and it fits perfectly with JCDR. It has grown considerably and I feel it has already grown up from its infancy to adolescence, achieving the status of standard online e-journal form Indian continent since its inception in Feb 2007. This had been made possible due to the efforts and the hard work put in it. The way the JCDR is improving with every new volume, with good quality original manuscripts, makes it a quality journal for readers. I must thank and congratulate Dr Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief JCDR and his team for their sincere efforts, dedication, and determination for making JCDR a fast growing journal.
Every one of us: authors, reviewers, editors, and publisher are responsible for enhancing the stature of the journal. I wish for a great success for JCDR."



Thanking you
With sincere regards
Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey, M.S., M. Ch., FAIS
Associate Professor,
Department of Paediatric Surgery, Gandhi Medical College & Associated
Kamla Nehru & Hamidia Hospitals Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh 462 001 (India)
E-mail: drrajendrak1@rediffmail.com
On May 11,2011




Dr. Shankar P.R.

"On looking back through my Gmail archives after being requested by the journal to write a short editorial about my experiences of publishing with the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), I came across an e-mail from Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor, in March 2007, which introduced the new electronic journal. The main features of the journal which were outlined in the e-mail were extensive author support, cash rewards, the peer review process, and other salient features of the journal.
Over a span of over four years, we (I and my colleagues) have published around 25 articles in the journal. In this editorial, I plan to briefly discuss my experiences of publishing with JCDR and the strengths of the journal and to finally address the areas for improvement.
My experiences of publishing with JCDR: Overall, my experiences of publishing withJCDR have been positive. The best point about the journal is that it responds to queries from the author. This may seem to be simple and not too much to ask for, but unfortunately, many journals in the subcontinent and from many developing countries do not respond or they respond with a long delay to the queries from the authors 1. The reasons could be many, including lack of optimal secretarial and other support. Another problem with many journals is the slowness of the review process. Editorial processing and peer review can take anywhere between a year to two years with some journals. Also, some journals do not keep the contributors informed about the progress of the review process. Due to the long review process, the articles can lose their relevance and topicality. A major benefit with JCDR is the timeliness and promptness of its response. In Dr Jain's e-mail which was sent to me in 2007, before the introduction of the Pre-publishing system, he had stated that he had received my submission and that he would get back to me within seven days and he did!
Most of the manuscripts are published within 3 to 4 months of their submission if they are found to be suitable after the review process. JCDR is published bimonthly and the accepted articles were usually published in the next issue. Recently, due to the increased volume of the submissions, the review process has become slower and it ?? Section can take from 4 to 6 months for the articles to be reviewed. The journal has an extensive author support system and it has recently introduced a paid expedited review process. The journal also mentions the average time for processing the manuscript under different submission systems - regular submission and expedited review.
Strengths of the journal: The journal has an online first facility in which the accepted manuscripts may be published on the website before being included in a regular issue of the journal. This cuts down the time between their acceptance and the publication. The journal is indexed in many databases, though not in PubMed. The editorial board should now take steps to index the journal in PubMed. The journal has a system of notifying readers through e-mail when a new issue is released. Also, the articles are available in both the HTML and the PDF formats. I especially like the new and colorful page format of the journal. Also, the access statistics of the articles are available. The prepublication and the manuscript tracking system are also helpful for the authors.
Areas for improvement: In certain cases, I felt that the peer review process of the manuscripts was not up to international standards and that it should be strengthened. Also, the number of manuscripts in an issue is high and it may be difficult for readers to go through all of them. The journal can consider tightening of the peer review process and increasing the quality standards for the acceptance of the manuscripts. I faced occasional problems with the online manuscript submission (Pre-publishing) system, which have to be addressed.
Overall, the publishing process with JCDR has been smooth, quick and relatively hassle free and I can recommend other authors to consider the journal as an outlet for their work."



Dr. P. Ravi Shankar
KIST Medical College, P.O. Box 14142, Kathmandu, Nepal.
E-mail: ravi.dr.shankar@gmail.com
On April 2011
Anuradha

Dear team JCDR, I would like to thank you for the very professional and polite service provided by everyone at JCDR. While i have been in the field of writing and editing for sometime, this has been my first attempt in publishing a scientific paper.Thank you for hand-holding me through the process.


Dr. Anuradha
E-mail: anuradha2nittur@gmail.com
On Jan 2020

Important Notice

Original article / research
Year : 2012 | Month : September | Volume : 6 | Issue : 7 | Page : 1219 - 1222 Full Version

"Leukergy”: The Simple Albeit Forgotten Test for Bone Infections


Published: September 1, 2012 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.7860/JCDR/2012/.2444
Sudeep Shetty, Thrivikrama Padur Tantry, Vinaya Bangera, Prashanth Mohan, Raju K.P., Arun Kudva, Sudarshan Bhandary

1. Department of Orthopaedics, AJ Institute of Medical Sciences, Kuntikana, Mangalore, India 575004. 2. Associate Professor, Department of Anaesthesiology, AJ Institute of Medical Sciences, Kuntikana, Mangalore, India 575004. 3. Senior Resident, Department of Orthopaedics, AJ Institute of medical Sciences, Kuntikana, Mangalore, India 575004. 4. Associate Professor, Department of Orthopaedics, Srinivas Institute of Medical Sciences, Mukka, Suratkal, Mangalore, India 575004. 5. Associate Professor, Department of Orthopaedics, Sapthagiri Institute of Medical Sciences, Bangalore, India 575004. 6. Senior Resident, Department of Orthopaedics, AJ Institute of medical Sciences, Kuntikana, Mangalore, India 575004. 7. Professor and HOD, Department of Orthopedics, AJ Institute of Medical Sciences, Mangalore, India.

Correspondence Address :
Dr Sudeep Shetty
Department of Orthopaedics,
AJ Institute of Medical Sciences, Kuntikana,
Mangalore, India - 575004.
Phone: 09845515659; Fax: 0824-2225541
drsudeepshetty@yahoo.com

Abstract

Background:
Acute infections of the bone and joints with overt signs of inflammation, sinus formation and systemic illness are relatively easy to diagnose, but the low grade infections are the more difficult ones.In the presence of normal clinical parameters like ESR, total WBC count, C-reactive protein and blood culture but with a clinical possibility of an infection, a positive leukergy plays an important role in the diagnosis and the management of bone and joint and soft tissue infections.
Aim of the Study:
To know the validity of leukergy in diagnosing of bone and joint infections, to compare and correlate leukergy with other clinical parameters, and also, to use leukergy for the premature diagnosis of low grade infections without any obvious clinical signs.
Materials and Methods:
Sixty patients with bone or joint infections underwent evaluation for the Total White Blood Cell Count (TWBCC), ESR, C-reactive protein (CRP), blood culture, X-rays of the affected parts, wound culture and for the leukargy agglomerate test of the peripheral blood. The percentage of the aggregated leukocytes on the slide was determined and clinical and laboratory grading was done.
Results:
The leukergy test was found to be positive in all the 60 patients who were studied, thus reflecting one hundred percent positivity, with ESR being the second (68%) other than clinical parameter which was studied.
Conclusion:
We conclude that leukergy is more specific in detecting infections as compared to other laboratory tests like ESR, total white cell count, blood culture or the C-reactive protein.

Keywords

Bone infection, Leukergy, Agglomerate test

Introduction
Bone joint, and soft tissue infections are the commonest problems which are encountered in our day to day orthopaedic practice. A prompt diagnosis of the bone and joint infections is important, in order for the appropriate treatment to be started as soon as possible, so that the most severe complications like osteomyelitis and septic arthritis can be prevented. The acute infections with overt signs of inflammation, sinus formation and systemic illness are relatively easy to diagnose, but the low grade infections are the more difficult ones. In the presence of normal clinical parameters like the Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (ESR), Total White Blood Cell Count (TWBCC), C-reactive protein (CRP) and blood culture but with a clinical possibility of an infection, a positive leukergy plays an important role in the diagnosis and the management of bone and joint and soft tissue infections. The persistent elevation of the ESR suggests an infection, but it is neither very sensitive nor specific (1),(2). The results are better if the ESR is considered in conjunction with the measurement of the C-reactive protein level, but even then it is generally unreliable. A low level of lactic acid in the fluid which is aspirated from a joint reliably rules out an infection, but an elevated level is not diagnostic (3). The radiographs may be difficult to interpret. Especially in the presence of an implant, isotope scanning is sensitive but not specific, and labeled white cell scanning gives a high incidence of false-positive results. Leukergy is one of the relatively newer techniques which are available for an easy and a prompt diagnosis of bone and joint infections and it is also cost effective. We undertook this study as an attempt to correlate the various clinical parameters with the phenomenon of leukergy in the diagnosis of bone and joint infections. Aim and Hypothesis of the Study We hypothesized that leukergy was a sensitive and an as reliable marker which was best correlated with other laboratory investigations and a cost effective and a rapid diagnostic tool in bone and joint infections. Also, leukergy can be used for an early diagnosis of low grade infections without any obvious clinical signs. Thus, our aim was to know the validity of leukergy in diagnosing of bone and joint infections, to compare and to correlate leukergy with other clinical parameters, and also, to use leukergy for an early diagnosis of low grade infections without any obvious clinical signs. The validity and the cost effectiveness of the same were also evaluated along with other variables.

Material and Methods

60 patients with bone and joint infections, who attended our hospital for the past 2 years as in-patients and outpatients, who were diagnosed to have bone and joint infections, were included in our prospective study. The patients with clinical criteria which were suggestive of bone and joint infections, those with asymptomatic bone and joint infections and symptomatic patients with normal clinical parameters were included in our study. After taking a detailed history and after an examination, hematological investigations which included TWBCC, ESR, CRP and blood culture were done. The X-rays of the affected parts and the wound culture too were obtained in all the patients and special investigations were carried out whenever they were necessary. In our study, the phenomenon of leukergy was based on the white cells which agglomerated in the peripheral blood of the patients with inflammatory diseases, and this detection was used for the diagnosis of the bone and joint infections. If the phenomenon of leukergy was observed, then it was considered as a positive test. The procedure of the leukergy test has been shown in the (Table/Fig 1). The calculation of leukergy was based on the formula, which is as follows: Leukergy % = [(number of cells in clumps)/300]*100. Thus, the percentage of the aggregated leukocytes on the slide was determined by counting 300 cells and this was calculated according to the above formula. The cells were considered as aggregated when 3 or more were at a distance of less than 1 cell diameter. A clinical and a laboratory grading were done, which are shown in (Table/Fig 2)(A) & (Table/Fig 2)(B).

Results

The demographic data has been shown in (Table/Fig 3). The patients, who were included, were in the age range from 1 to 80 years. The type of presentation with respect to the surgery and the type of infection has been highlighted in (Table/Fig 3). A non- surgical cause of the infection (78.3%) was the most common type of presentation, with osteomyelitis being the most common infection (20%), (Table/Fig 3). Different parameters like ESR, total WBC count, CRP, blood culture and the organisms which were isolated were categorized accordingly and the details have been shown in (Table/Fig 4). A majority (68.3%) had ESR of more than 30, though the alterations in the TWBCC were equally distributed from the normal upper limit range. CRP was positive in a significant majority of the patients, which was in contrast to what was seen in the blood culture. 48% patients had Staphylococcus aureus in the wounds, as was evidenced from the culture. However, with no growth was observed in 43% of the patients (Table/Fig 4). The clinical and the leukergy grading are shown in (Table/Fig 5). (Table/Fig 6) presents a correlation between the various tests. The leukergy test was found to be positive in all the 60 patients who were studied, thus reflecting one hundred percent positivity, with ESR being the second (68%) other than clinical parameter which was studied (Table/Fig 6).

Discussion

Fleck (4) described “Leukergy” as a phenomenon which was found in citrated blood, which manifested itself as an agglomeration of the clumping of leukocytes. They explained that in this phenomenon, the clumps could contain up to 20 to more cells with a marked tendency of cellular homogenecity. They also suggested that this phenomenon could appear in infectious diseases in man and animals, and that it could be experimentally elicited by an intravenous injection of live or killed gram negative bacteria [e.g. Bacterium Coli, Salmonella Typhi, Bacterium Proteus] or by an intra-pleural injection of turpentine (4). The high occurrence of leukergy in infectious diseases and the regular appearance of leukergy in the experiments seem to allow us to look on it as a phenomenon with a distinct role in the pathogenesis of the disease (4). In 1983, Karivand Medalia et al., applied this phenomenon to diagnose real bacterial infections in mice (5). The procedure was based on the observation that bacterial infections were associated with the clumping of leukocytes. Their study demonstrated that the infection of mice with either E. coli or P. mirabilis which were limited strictly to the urinary tract, resulted in elevated leukergy values. The difference between these two bacteria in increasing the leukergy values may be due to the greater severity of the P. mirabilis infection. E.coli mainly affects the bladder (cystitis) whereas in the P. mirabilis infection, the bacteriuria indicates a kidney involvement (6). Though a number of previous investigators had demonstrated the effectiveness of this tool in different scenarios, it was Fleck et al.,(7) who simplified it further and conducted investigations both in adults and in laboratory animals (8), which indicated that the leukergy test had the potential of a diagnostic tool. The methodology which was followed in our study for calculating the percentage of leukergy was very similar to that which was used their studies. Otremski et al., (9) claimed the diagnostic importance of the leukergy test in bone and joint infections when they observed more than 98% positivity in their group of patients. It was more accurate than ESR, TWBCC, or a blood culture. Also, the effectiveness of the treatment was correlated with the leukergic test values. Our study has shown that the quantitative assessment of leukergy in the peripheral venous blood was a useful test for the diagnosis of bone sepsis and for monitoring the infective process during the therapy. Our study also demonstrated that leukergy was found to be more sensitive than the TWBCC or ESR. In the 60 patients who were studied, leukergy was found to be positive in all the cases with infections, whereas the white cell count was found to be positive in only 32 patients and the ESR was identified only in 41 patients. A study with 100% effectiveness requires no statistical analysis to prove the same. Occasionally, leukergy was found to forewarn us of an impending deterioration before the appearance of the clinical signs and to indicate the necessity for a continued antibiotic treatment. It proved to be a reliable indicator of the disease activity even when the other laboratory tests were normal. Previous attempts (9) which were made to develop a serological technique for the reliable diagnosis of bone infections resulted in complicated tests which required special equipment. At the same time, these proved to be expensive and unreliable. The measurement of leukergy has been shown to be a simple, rapid and an inexpensive technique which required no special equipment. In our study, we did not explore the mechanism of leukergy but only documented its relationship to bone sepsis. This phenomenon probably results from a cellular rather than a humeral activity. During bacteraemia, the circulating mediators are released, which lead to an increased sensitivity of the neutophil adhesive receptors, as was claimed previously. One needs to consider the important relevant application of this test in other conditions too. More recently, the widespread use of a simple urine-drop test for the antigen detection, which was feasible even in a peripheral community environment, which was developed by Fleck, was considered to be related to the above test (9). The differentiation of the bacterial from the viral infections by using a simple single test slide: the role of the leukergy test could not be neglected (10). The transient myocardial ischaemia which was seen during the exercise testing was related to the leukergy test, as was reported by Kowalki et al., recently (11). The evaluation of the leukergy test as an indicator of infections in the hip joints in children was considered to be relevant in 2000 by Sharma et al. (12). The microvascular response in patients with cardiogenic shock was also linked to the leukergy phenominon in 2000 by Kirschenbaum et al. (13) The leukergy test may be valuable in distinguishing the septic from the mechanical loosening of prostheses, as was claimed previously (14). A more precise bone scan may be performed alternate to the above detailed test; however, the facilities and the cost may limit the investigation.Though its sensitivity is far higher than that of the leukergy test in bone infections, not at all the time is it specific eg. in malignancy. It should be noted, however, that the leukergy result must be interpreted with caution, since its level may be raised in some non infectious conditions such as polycythaemia rubra vara, Ischemic heart disease and in some rheumatic diseases. The leukergy test is simple and rapid and it can be done in any laboratory facility after a brief training. The time which is taken for testing the leukergy is few minutes, whereas the other tests take few hours to days.

Conclusion

Leukergy was positive in all the patients and it was detected the presence of an infection in all the cases. Leukergy was proved to be more specific than other laboratory tests. But the role of the leukergy test has been found to be extensive and infinite [15, 16]. The leukergy test is simple, short and inexpensive and it helps in the early diagnosis of an impending infection. It can serve as a routine test in any clinical setting for detecting the presence of an infection. We conclude that leukergy was more specific in detecting an infection when it was compared to other laboratory tests like ESR, total white cell count, blood culture or the C-reactive protein.

References

1.
Carlsson AS. The erythrocyte sedimentation rate in infected and non-infected total-hip arthroplasties. Acta Orthop Scand. 1978; 49:287-90.
2.
Sanzén L, Carlsson AS. The diagnostic value of the C-reactive protein in infected total hip arthroplasties. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1989; 71: 638-41.
3.
Curtis GD, Newman RJ, Slack MP. Synovial fluid lactate and the diagnosis of septic arthritis. J Infect. 1983; 6:239-46.
4.
Fleck L, Borecka D. Zachowanie sie odczynu leukergicznego wróznych stanach chorobowych, Ann. UMCS Sect. D 1946; 1, 335–49.
5.
Kariv N, Medalia O, Aronson M. The leukocyte agglomeration test reveals the bacterial infections in mice. Lab Anim Sci. 1983; 33: 361-63.
6.
Hammerschmidt DE, Bowers TK, Lammi-Keefe CJ, Jacob HS, Craddock PR. Granulocyte aggregometry: a sensitive technique for the detection of C5a and complement activation. Blood. 1980; 55:898-902.
7.
FleckL, Murczynska Z. The phenomenon of laeukergy. Arch Pathol (Chic). 1949; 47:261-72.
8.
Kariv M. Laeukocyte aggregation (Leukergy): an aid to the rapid diagnosis of an infectious state. Israel J. of Med. Sci. 1980; 16: 466.
9.
Weisz GM, Grzybowski A. Rapid urinary antigen diagnosis of infectious diseases: the legacy of Dr. Ludwik Fleck. Wurzbg Medizinhist Mitt. 2010; 29:314-24.
10.
Goor Y. Differentiation of the bacterial from the viral infections by a simple single test slide: the leukergy test. Am J Clin Pathol. 2002; 117:494-95.
11.
Kowalski J, Pawlicki L, Baj Z, Pasnik J, Olejniczak J. The effect of trimetazidine on the biological activity of neutrophils in patients with transient myocardial ischemia which was induced by exercise testing. Pol Merkur Lekarski. 2000; 9:548-51.
12.
Sharma M, Sethi S, Gill SS, Saha S, Singh M. Evaluation of the leukergy test as an indicator of infections in hip joints in children. Indian J Pathol Microbiol. 2000; 43:331-36.
13.
Kirschenbaum LA, Astiz ME, Rackow EC, Saha DC, Lin R. The microvascular response in patients with cardiogenic shock. Crit Care Med. 2000; 28:1290-94.
14.
Otremski I, Newman RJ, Kahn PJ, Stadler J, Kariv N, Skornik Y, et al. Leukergy–a new diagnostic test for bone infections. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1993; 75:734-36.
15.
Berliner S, Sclarovsky S, Lavie G, Pinkhas J, Aronson M, Agmon J. The leukergy test in patients with ischemic heart disease. Am Heart J. 1986; 111:19-22.
16.
Rinaldo JE. The mediation of ARDS by leukocytes. The clinical evidence and the implications for therapy. Chest. 1986; 89:590-93.

DOI and Others

ID: JCDR/2012/4801:2444

Financial OR OTHER COMPETING INTERESTS:
None.
Date of Submission: May 07, 2012
Date of Peer Review: Jul 05, 2012
Date of Acceptance: Jul 30, 2012
Date of Publishing: Sep 30, 2012

JCDR is now Monthly and more widely Indexed .
  • Emerging Sources Citation Index (Web of Science, thomsonreuters)
  • Index Copernicus ICV 2017: 134.54
  • Academic Search Complete Database
  • Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ)
  • Embase
  • EBSCOhost
  • Google Scholar
  • HINARI Access to Research in Health Programme
  • Indian Science Abstracts (ISA)
  • Journal seek Database
  • Google
  • Popline (reproductive health literature)
  • www.omnimedicalsearch.com