Lymphatic Filariasis (LF) affects over 120 million people in 72 countries, with sub-periodic filariasis common in the Pacific. Wuchereria bancrofti has three physiological races, each with a unique microfilarial periodicity, and each race is isolated to a specific geographical region. Sub-periodic W. bancrofti is transmitted by various Aedes mosquito species, with Aedes polynesiensis and Aedes samoanus being the primary vectors in Samoa. The Aedes scutellaris and Aedes kochi groups are also important vectors in the South Pacific Islands. Anopheles species are important vectors of filariasis in rural areas of Asia and Africa. The Anopheles gambiae complex, Anopheles funestus, and the Anopheles punctulatus group are the most important vectors of W. bancrofti. These vectors exhibit indoor nocturnal biting behaviour and breed in a variety of habitats, including freshwater, saltwater, and temporary water bodies. Effective vector surveillance is central to LF control and elimination programs. However, the traditional Human Landing Collection (HLC) method, while valuable, poses ethical concerns and risks to collectors. Therefore, this review critically analyses alternative trapping tools for Aedes and Anopheles vectors in LF-endemic regions. We looked at 14 research publications that discussed W. bancrofti vector trapping methods. Pyrethrum Spray Catches (PSC), one of the seven traps studied for Anopheles LF vectors, was revealed to be the second most effective strategy after HLC, successfully catching Anopheles vectors in Nigeria, Ghana, Togo, and Burkina Faso. The PSC method has several drawbacks, such as the likelihood of overlooking exophilic mosquitoes or underestimating Anopheles populations. However, exit traps offered hope for capturing exophilic mosquitoes. Anopheles populations could also be sampled using the Anopheles Gravid Trap (AGT). In contrast, the effectiveness of the Double Net Traps (DNT) and the CDC Light Trap (CDC LT) varied. Gravid mosquito traps like the OviArt Gravid Trap (AGT) were shown to be useful tools for identifying endophilic and exophilic vectors during the exploration of novel collection techniques. The Stealth trap (ST) was suggested for sampling Anopheles mosquitoes, although specimen damage may make it difficult to identify the species. Although it needs more confirmation, the Ifakara Tent Trap C design (ITT-C) showed potential for outdoor mosquito sampling in Tanzania. Furvela tent traps successfully captured a variety of Anopheles species and are appropriate for use in a variety of eco-epidemiological settings. By contrast, for Aedes LF vectors, no specific sampling tool was identified for Aedes niveus, necessitating further research and development. However, traps like the Duplex cone trap, Resting Bucket Trap (RB), and Sticky Resting Bucket trap (SRB) proved effective for sampling Aedes albopictus, offering potential alternatives to HLC. This review emphasises the value of looking into alternative trapping methods for Aedes and Anopheles vectors in the LF-endemic region. Further research is required to determine the efficacy of novel collection techniques in various contexts, even if PSC and AGT show promise for sampling Anopheles vectors. The identified traps, along with ongoing research, provide valuable contributions to vector surveillance efforts in LF-endemic regions, enabling LF control and elimination strategies to advance.
