The Evaluation of a Dipstick Test for Plasmodium falciparum in Mining Areas of Venezuela

Caraballo, Alejandro; Aché, Alberto

doi:10.4269/ajtmh.1996.55.482

Cited by 21 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The OptiMAL test shows sensitivity similar to those reported for other dipsticks, such as ParaSight and ICT Malaria Pf/Pv, which ranged from 86-100 and 58-96%, respectively (3,20,(28)(29)(30)(31)(32)(33) Coleman et al (35) evaluated the efficacy of the ICT Malaria Pf/Pv in a large study of 559 asymptomatic patients from an endemic area of Thailand using conventional microscopy as the reference method, and found that the sensitivity for P. falciparum dropped from 100 to 23.3% when the parasitemia was below 500 trophozoites/µL. For P. vivax infections, the sensitivity dropped from 66.7% to 0 at parasitemia below 500 trophozoites/µL.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 55%

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: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 55%

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

“…A positive case of P. falciparum infection was defined as a patient with acute febrile illness accompanied by positive peripheral smear/ bone marrow examination and/ or a febrile patient with strong clinical suspicion of malarial infection, a positive Parasight-F test along with dramatic improvement when treated with standard antimalarial therapy, and exclusion of other etiological agents by appropriate investigations. The latter assumption is based on the very high specificity of the Parasight-F test in detecting P. falciparum cases, as shown by various clinical trials and field studies [4][5][6][7][9][10][11]. Also, It has been postulated and argued by several researchers that the Parasight-F test can be positive in a proportion of severe and complicated cases of patient infection with P. falciparum, who may be aparasitemic by the time they are admitted to a hospital, due to inadequate antimalarial treatment or low grade chloroquine resistance, resulting in negative smears.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This antigen is secreted early during the erythrocytic cycle of the parasite, with a peak during schizont rupture. Various clinical trials done to evaluate the diagnostic sensitivity and specificity of this test have shown a sensitivity varying from 86.7% to 93.4% and a specificity of from 98.2% to 99.3% [4,5,6]. In India, Pinto et al have reported that this technique can be superior to peripheral smear staining and helps in making an early diagnosis [7].…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Role of the Parasight-F test in the diagnosis of complicated Plasmodium falciparum malarial infection

Arora¹,

Gaiha²,

Arora³

2003

Braz J Infect Dis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An evaluation was made of the diagnostic efficacy and utility of the Parasight-F test in diagnosing Plasmodium falciparum malaria, compared with conventional microscopy, particularly in severe and complicated cases. This study was designed as a prospective, case control hospital-based study. Febrile patients suspected to be suffering from malaria were selected randomly and were subjected to peripheral smear examinations (thick and thin) and Parasight-F tests till the required number of at least 30 cases of P. falciparum infection were identified, including at least 15 complicated cases. In addition 20 cases of P. vivax malarial infection as well as 20 healthy age and sex-matched individuals were taken as two control groups. The outcome measure was the number of cases with positive Parasight-F test results compared with conventional microscopy. Thirty-two patients with P. falciparum malaria were identified, with 15 severe and complicated cases. Peripheral smears were positive in 29 (91%) of these, while parasight-F test was positive in 31 out of 32 (97%) cases. Parasites were detected only by bone marrow examination in one case. Diagnostic sensitivity and specificity of peripheral smears for detecting falciparum infection were 90.6% and 100% respectively while that of the Parasight-F test were 96.8% and 100%, respectively (P>.05). The Parasight-F test has high sensitivity and specificity in diagnosing P. falciparum malarial infection, comparable to or even higher than microscopy exams, particularly in severe and complicated cases, with additional advantages of speed, simplicity and objectivity.

show abstract

“…The OptiMAL test was run with 127 samples. Among 57 samples positive by microscopy, eight were negative (9,13,42,8,80,32,16, and 16 parasites/l, respectively) and one showed a non-distinct pattern (144 parasites/l) (84% sensitive). Among 70 samples negative by microscopy, none were positive by the OptiMAL test (100% specific).…”

Section: Assay Format and Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The antigenic activity of HRP-2 has also been found to persist in the blood stream long after a malarial episode has been resolved by antimalarial therapy. 8,9 The possibility that HRP-2 persists after infection would negate the possibility of using HRP-2-based assays for monitoring anti-malarial therapy and detecting drug-resistant infections.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Immunocapture diagnostic assays for malaria using Plasmodium lactate dehydrogenase (pLDH).

Piper¹,

Lebras²,

Wentworth³

et al. 1999

The American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene

201

162

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. We have developed two diagnostic assays based on the specific detection of Plasmodium lactate dehydrogenase (pLDH) activity. These assays exploit a panel of monoclonal antibodies that capture the parasite enzyme and allow for the quantitation and speciation of human malaria infections. An immunocapture pLDH activity assay (ICpLDH) allows for the rapid purification and measurement of pLDH from infected blood using the NAD analog APAD, which reacts specifically with Plasmodium LDH isoforms. An immunochromatographic test (the OptiMAL assay) was also formatted and allowed the detection of parasite infections of ϳ200 parasites/l of blood. By using a combination of antibodies, both tests can not only detect but differentiate between P. falciparum and non-P. falciparum malaria. Both assays show a sensitivity comparable with other commercial nonmicroscopic tests; importantly, we found very few instances of false-positive samples, especially with samples from patients recently cleared of malaria infection. Furthermore, we find that when one uses the quantitative ICpLDH assay, the levels of pLDH activity closely mirror the levels of parasitemia in both initial diagnosis and while following patient therapy. We conclude that diagnostic tests based on the detection of pLDH are both sensitive and practical for the detection, speciation, and quantitation of all human Plasmodium infections and can also be used to indicate drug-resistant infections.

show abstract

The Evaluation of a Dipstick Test for Plasmodium falciparum in Mining Areas of Venezuela

Cited by 21 publications

References 0 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

Role of the Parasight-F test in the diagnosis of complicated Plasmodium falciparum malarial infection

Immunocapture diagnostic assays for malaria using Plasmodium lactate dehydrogenase (pLDH).

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About