疟原虫寄生虫血症的水平能决定对各种诊断测试的敏感性吗?

O. Goselle, G. Y. Ajiji, A. Jambol, J. Sunday, Ojochemi Sunday Idoko, S. S. Udoh, Oliseemeka Charles Ejete, Y. M. Ahmadu, H. Awobode, G. Imandeh, B. Matur
{"title":"疟原虫寄生虫血症的水平能决定对各种诊断测试的敏感性吗?","authors":"O. Goselle, G. Y. Ajiji, A. Jambol, J. Sunday, Ojochemi Sunday Idoko, S. S. Udoh, Oliseemeka Charles Ejete, Y. M. Ahmadu, H. Awobode, G. Imandeh, B. Matur","doi":"10.4236/ajmb.2020.103015","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The discovery of Plasmodium parasites and its incrimination as the principal cause of malaria in humans has continued to excite researchers towards inventing possible easier methods of diagnosing and identifying these pathological agents in order to mitigate, control and eliminate its continuous scourge to humanity. Currently, three diagnostic methods have been proposed, but agreements as to whether the level of parasitaemia in an individual could connote likely confirmations in the three methods i.e. gold standard, RDTs’ and PCR/NESTED PCR, have continued to be a subject of debate. To lay to rest the debate as reported in many studies, we collected blood samples from 100 symptomatic patients who reported to the Jos-Nigeria hospital and using the gold standard methods, we were able to confirm that 30 (30%) samples out of the 100 blood samples collected were positive to P. falciparum, chiefly recorded among duffy-negative Africans. Excited with our findings, we prepared the thick blood films for each sample and used it to estimate the levels of parasitaemia (parasites density) per μl of blood (i.e. 1+; 2+; 3+ and 4+) per 100 high power fields (|HPF). We then subjected the individually confirmed parasite density samples to the other two methods i.e. Rapid Diagnostic Test (one-step RTD and optimal-IT® RDT) and to molecular assay (PCR and the nested PCR). Interestingly, of the 30 positive samples, 18 (60%) were confirmed positive to the one-step and optimal-IT® RDTS, while 3 (30%) out of the 10 (100%) samples of various parasite density subjected to molecular assay (PCR and the nested PCR) were positive to only P. falciparum. Statistical analysis of variance based on single factor computed using SPSS indicates a no significant difference (P > 0.05) in the parasitaemia levels of the four groups/categories of patients; i.e. variance ratio of 0.011976 calculated was less than F-critical (2.816466) at 5% (0.05). Whereas gold standard could be considered as the optimal method, for the PCR/NESTED PCR, the sensitivity is dependent on high level of parasitaemia.","PeriodicalId":65391,"journal":{"name":"美国分子生物学期刊(英文)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Could the Level in Parasitaemia of Plasmodium Determine Sensitivity to Various Diagnostic Tests?\",\"authors\":\"O. Goselle, G. Y. Ajiji, A. Jambol, J. Sunday, Ojochemi Sunday Idoko, S. S. Udoh, Oliseemeka Charles Ejete, Y. M. Ahmadu, H. Awobode, G. Imandeh, B. Matur\",\"doi\":\"10.4236/ajmb.2020.103015\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The discovery of Plasmodium parasites and its incrimination as the principal cause of malaria in humans has continued to excite researchers towards inventing possible easier methods of diagnosing and identifying these pathological agents in order to mitigate, control and eliminate its continuous scourge to humanity. Currently, three diagnostic methods have been proposed, but agreements as to whether the level of parasitaemia in an individual could connote likely confirmations in the three methods i.e. gold standard, RDTs’ and PCR/NESTED PCR, have continued to be a subject of debate. To lay to rest the debate as reported in many studies, we collected blood samples from 100 symptomatic patients who reported to the Jos-Nigeria hospital and using the gold standard methods, we were able to confirm that 30 (30%) samples out of the 100 blood samples collected were positive to P. falciparum, chiefly recorded among duffy-negative Africans. Excited with our findings, we prepared the thick blood films for each sample and used it to estimate the levels of parasitaemia (parasites density) per μl of blood (i.e. 1+; 2+; 3+ and 4+) per 100 high power fields (|HPF). We then subjected the individually confirmed parasite density samples to the other two methods i.e. Rapid Diagnostic Test (one-step RTD and optimal-IT® RDT) and to molecular assay (PCR and the nested PCR). Interestingly, of the 30 positive samples, 18 (60%) were confirmed positive to the one-step and optimal-IT® RDTS, while 3 (30%) out of the 10 (100%) samples of various parasite density subjected to molecular assay (PCR and the nested PCR) were positive to only P. falciparum. Statistical analysis of variance based on single factor computed using SPSS indicates a no significant difference (P > 0.05) in the parasitaemia levels of the four groups/categories of patients; i.e. variance ratio of 0.011976 calculated was less than F-critical (2.816466) at 5% (0.05). Whereas gold standard could be considered as the optimal method, for the PCR/NESTED PCR, the sensitivity is dependent on high level of parasitaemia.\",\"PeriodicalId\":65391,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"美国分子生物学期刊(英文)\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"美国分子生物学期刊(英文)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1089\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4236/ajmb.2020.103015\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"美国分子生物学期刊(英文)","FirstCategoryId":"1089","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4236/ajmb.2020.103015","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

疟原虫的发现及其作为人类疟疾主要病因的定罪,继续促使研究人员发明可能更简单的诊断和识别这些病理因子的方法,以减轻、控制和消除其对人类的持续祸害。目前,已经提出了三种诊断方法,但关于个体的寄生虫血症水平是否意味着三种方法(即金标准、RDTs和PCR/NESTED PCR)可能得到证实的一致性,仍然是一个争论的主题。为了平息许多研究中报道的争论,我们从向乔斯尼日利亚医院报告的100名有症状的患者身上采集了血液样本,并使用金标准方法,我们能够确认在采集的100份血液样本中,有30份(30%)样本对恶性疟原虫呈阳性,主要记录在阴性的非洲人中。对我们的发现感到兴奋,我们为每个样本制备了厚血膜,并用它来估计每100个高功率场(|HPF)每μl血液(即1+、2+、3+和4+)的寄生虫血症(寄生虫密度)水平。然后,我们对单独确认的寄生虫密度样本进行其他两种方法,即快速诊断测试(一步RTD和最佳IT®RDT)和分子测定(PCR和嵌套PCR)。有趣的是,在30个阳性样本中,18个(60%)被证实对一步和最佳IT®RDTS呈阳性,而在经过分子分析(PCR和嵌套PCR)的不同寄生虫密度的10个(100%)样本中,有3个(30%)仅对恶性疟原虫呈阳性。使用SPSS计算的基于单因素的方差统计分析表明,四组/类别患者的寄生虫血症水平没有显著差异(P>0.05);即计算出的0.011976的方差比小于5%(0.05)的F临界值(2.816466)。虽然金标准可以被认为是最佳方法,但对于PCR/NESTED PCR,灵敏度取决于高水平的寄生虫血症。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Could the Level in Parasitaemia of Plasmodium Determine Sensitivity to Various Diagnostic Tests?
The discovery of Plasmodium parasites and its incrimination as the principal cause of malaria in humans has continued to excite researchers towards inventing possible easier methods of diagnosing and identifying these pathological agents in order to mitigate, control and eliminate its continuous scourge to humanity. Currently, three diagnostic methods have been proposed, but agreements as to whether the level of parasitaemia in an individual could connote likely confirmations in the three methods i.e. gold standard, RDTs’ and PCR/NESTED PCR, have continued to be a subject of debate. To lay to rest the debate as reported in many studies, we collected blood samples from 100 symptomatic patients who reported to the Jos-Nigeria hospital and using the gold standard methods, we were able to confirm that 30 (30%) samples out of the 100 blood samples collected were positive to P. falciparum, chiefly recorded among duffy-negative Africans. Excited with our findings, we prepared the thick blood films for each sample and used it to estimate the levels of parasitaemia (parasites density) per μl of blood (i.e. 1+; 2+; 3+ and 4+) per 100 high power fields (|HPF). We then subjected the individually confirmed parasite density samples to the other two methods i.e. Rapid Diagnostic Test (one-step RTD and optimal-IT® RDT) and to molecular assay (PCR and the nested PCR). Interestingly, of the 30 positive samples, 18 (60%) were confirmed positive to the one-step and optimal-IT® RDTS, while 3 (30%) out of the 10 (100%) samples of various parasite density subjected to molecular assay (PCR and the nested PCR) were positive to only P. falciparum. Statistical analysis of variance based on single factor computed using SPSS indicates a no significant difference (P > 0.05) in the parasitaemia levels of the four groups/categories of patients; i.e. variance ratio of 0.011976 calculated was less than F-critical (2.816466) at 5% (0.05). Whereas gold standard could be considered as the optimal method, for the PCR/NESTED PCR, the sensitivity is dependent on high level of parasitaemia.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
188
期刊最新文献
Comparison of Two Molecular Diagnostic Tests for COVID-19: Abbott RealTime SARS-CoV-2 and Allplex™ 2019-nCoV, in the Epidemic Context in Senegal Identification and Characterization of Hepatitis B Virus Immune Escape Mutants in Kenya Comparative Performance of Microscopy and Nested PCR for the Detection of Cryptosporidium Species in Patients Living with HIV/Aids in Abidjan (Côte d’Ivoire) Insight into Genetic Diversity of Cultivated Lima Bean (Phaseolus lunatus L.) in Benin Association of Host Interferon-γ Gene Polymorphism with Toxoplasma gondii Infection in Pregnant Women of Bangladesh
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1