Diagnostic performance characteristics of rapid dipstick test for Plasmodium vivax malaria

Aslan, Gönül; Ulukanlıgil, Mustafa; Seyrek, Adnan; Erel, Özcan

doi:10.1590/s0074-02762001000500018

Cited by 21 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The significantly lower sensitivity of the OptiMAL test agrees with many reports from Afghanistan, Turkey, Kuwait, Honduras, and Peru (17)(18)(19)(20)(21) in which the test showed sensitivities ranging from 79.3 to 94% but specificities ranging from 97 to 100%. Other studies from Thailand, USA, Honduras and Colombia (22)(23)(24)(25) have shown sensitivities and specificities close to 100%, while one study from Canada (26) showed a sensitivity of 29.1 but a specificity of 95.6%.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

Comparison of the diagnosis of malaria by microscopy, immunochromatography and PCR in endemic areas of Venezuela

Rodulfo

Donato

Mora

et al. 2007

Braz J Med Biol Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Whole blood samples (N = 295) were obtained from different locations in Amazonas and Sucre States, in Venezuela. Malaria was diagnosed by microscopy, OptiMAL™ and polymerase chain reaction (PCR), with Plasmodium vivax, P. falciparum, and P. malariae being detected when possible. We identified 93 infections, 66 of which were caused by P. vivax, 26 by P. falciparum, and 1 was a mixed infection. No infection caused by P. malariae was detected. The sensitivity and specificity of each diagnostic method were high: 95.7 and 97.9% for microscopy, 87.0 and 97.9% for OptiMAL, and 98.0 and 100% for PCR, respectively. Most samples (72.2%) showed more than 5000 parasites/µL blood. The sensitivity of the diagnosis by microscopy and OptiMAL decreased with lower parasitemia. All samples showing disagreement among the methods were reevaluated, but the first result was used for the calculations. Parasites were detected in the 6 false-negative samples by microscopy after the second examination. The mixed infection was only detected by PCR, while the other methods diagnosed it as P. falciparum (microscopy) or P. vivax (OptiMAL) infection. Most of the false results obtained with the OptiMAL strip were related to the P. falciparum-specific band, including 3 species misdiagnoses, which could be related to the test itself or to genetic variation of the Venezuelan strains. The use of the microscopic method for malaria detection is recommended for its low cost but is very difficult to implement in large scale, population-based studies; thus, we report here more efficient methods suitable for this purpose.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

Comparison of the diagnosis of malaria by microscopy, immunochromatography and PCR in endemic areas of Venezuela

Rodulfo

Donato

Mora

et al. 2007

Braz J Med Biol Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…According to several recent trials, RDTs targeting pLDH could yield a number of advantages compared to those targeting HRP-2 [27]. The sensitivity for detecting P. vivax may be higher, although this might depend on the subspecies [21,32,35]. In addition, they may have a role in the evaluation of treatment response, as pLDH activity shows some correlation with parasite density [35].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…â reported an overall sensitivity of 20 %-79 % [15,16,19,20]. The OptiMAL â test yielded a somewhat better sensitivity of 69 %-93 % [19,21,22].…”

Section: Sensitivitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Malaria Rapid Tests - Perspectives for Malaria Endemic and Non-Endemic Regions. Malariaschnelltests - Perspektiven fur Regionen mit und ohne endemischer Malaria

Schmidt

2003

Laboratoriums Mediz

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary: Rapid, reliable and affordable diagnostic means are indispensable for the diagnosis and treatment of malaria. Recently, immunochromatographic rapid tests (RDT) for the detection of malaria parasites in blood have been developed as an alternative to conventional diagnosis with light microscopy. Currently available tests target different Plasmodium‐specific antigens, and some RDTs also allow the differentiation of malaria tropica (P. falciparum) from the other forms. The performance RDTs in terms of sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive value, and reliability is discussed. For most parameters, various studies have shown an acceptable or good test performance. Of concern is the failure of RDTs to diagnose individual cases of high parasitemia. In highly endemic regions, the utility of RDTs is limited. In these regions, the widespread prevalence of asymptomatic parasitemia leads to a high rate of false positive test results. RDTs seem to be most useful in areas with low to moderate malaria transmission, especially in the presence of multiple drug resistance. They are useful in the management of malaria outbreaks within populations with a low degree of malaria specific immunity. RDTs can help inexperienced hospital staff in non‐endemic regions to diagnose cases of imported malaria. The self‐use of RDTs by travellers is subject to controversy. In conclusion, RDTs are an additional tool for the diagnosis of malaria but in most settings do not replace light microscopy.

show abstract

“…Most recent epidemiological studies in endemic areas of malaria have been carried out with symptomatic patients and attempt to correlate the infection with epidemiological factors 5,6,9 . The use of more precise diagnostic methods in population based studies, allowing for screening for both symptomatic and asymptomatic individuals taken at random from the population, could produce a better understanding of the multiple epidemiological factors affecting malaria infection.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

High prevalence of malaria infection in Amazonas state, Venezuela

Rodulfo

Donato

Quijada

et al. 2007

Rev. Inst. Med. trop. S. Paulo

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SUMMARYThis study was carried out to determine the incidence of malaria in an endemic region of Amazonas State, Venezuela. For this, 200 random samples were collected from symptomatic and asymptomatic individuals from San Fernando de Atabapo and Santa Barbara. Epidemiological factors were related to malaria infection, which was diagnosed by microscopy observation and amplification of the 18S rDNA sequence by PCR. Malaria prevalence in these populations was 28.5%, whilst P. vivax and P. falciparum prevalences were 12 and 17%, respectively. No infection by P. malariae was found. A mixed infection was found on an asymptomatic individual. Prevalence patterns differed between age groups depending on the Plasmodium species. We found that 34.8% of the P. vivax and 15.2% of the P. falciparum infections were asymptomatic. The use of nets was helpful to prevent P. vivax infection, but did not protect against P. falciparum infection. The results suggest the presence of more than one mosquito vector in the area, displaying a differential pattern of infection for each Plasmodium species. There appear to be risk factors associated with malaria infections in some individuals. The population based approach and PCR diagnosis improved the accuracy of the statistical analysis in the study.

show abstract

Diagnostic performance characteristics of rapid dipstick test for Plasmodium vivax malaria

Cited by 21 publications

References 8 publications

Comparison of the diagnosis of malaria by microscopy, immunochromatography and PCR in endemic areas of Venezuela

Comparison of the diagnosis of malaria by microscopy, immunochromatography and PCR in endemic areas of Venezuela

Malaria Rapid Tests - Perspectives for Malaria Endemic and Non-Endemic Regions. Malariaschnelltests - Perspektiven fur Regionen mit und ohne endemischer Malaria

High prevalence of malaria infection in Amazonas state, Venezuela

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About