2024-03-29T13:23:29Zhttp://repisalud.isciii.es/oai/requestoai:repisalud.isciii.es:20.500.12105/76172023-10-10T09:09:48Zcom_20.500.12105_2074com_20.500.12105_2052com_20.500.12105_2051col_20.500.12105_2075
Repisalud
author
Berzosa, Pedro
author
Lucio, Aida de
author
Romay-Barja, Maria
author
Herrador, Zaida
author
Gonzalez-Mora, Vicenta
author
Garcia, Luz
author
Fernandez-Martinez, Amalia
author
Santana-Morales, Maria
author
Ncogo, Policarpo
author
Valladares, Basilio
author
Riloha, Matilde
author
Benito, Agustin
funder
Instituto de Salud Carlos III
funder
Agencia Española de Cooperación Internacional para el Desarrollo
funder
RETICS-Investigación colaborativa en Enfermedades Tropicales (RICET-ISCIII) (España)
2019-05-21T07:55:21Z
2019-05-21T07:55:21Z
2018-09-17
Malar J. 2018 Sep 17;17(1):333.
1475-2875
http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12105/7617
30223852
10.1186/s12936-018-2481-4
1475-2875
Malaria journal
BACKGROUND: Malaria in Equatorial Guinea remains a major public health problem. The country is a holo-endemic area with a year-round transmission pattern. In 2016, the prevalence of malaria was 12.09% and malaria caused 15% of deaths among children under 5 years. In the Continental Region, 95.2% of malaria infections were Plasmodium falciparum, 9.5% Plasmodium vivax, and eight cases mixed infection in 2011. The main strategy for malaria control is quick and accurate diagnosis followed by effective treatment. Early and accurate diagnosis of malaria is essential for both effective disease management and malaria surveillance. The quality of malaria diagnosis is important in all settings, as misdiagnosis can result in significant morbidity and mortality. Microscopy and RDTs are the primary choices for diagnosing malaria in the field. However, false-negative results may delay treatment and increase the number of persons capable of infecting mosquitoes in the community. The present study analysed the performance of microscopy and RDTs, the two main techniques used in Equatorial Guinea for the diagnosis of malaria, compared to semi-nested multiplex PCR (SnM-PCR). RESULTS: A total of 1724 samples tested by microscopy, RDT, and SnM-PCR were analysed. Among the negative samples detected by microscopy, 335 (19.4%) were false negatives. On the other hand, the negative samples detected by RDT, 128 (13.3%) were false negatives based on PCR. This finding is important, especially since it is a group of patients who did not receive antimalarial treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Owing to the high number of false negatives in microscopy, it is necessary to reinforce training in microscopy, the "Gold Standard" in endemic areas. A network of reference centres could potentially support ongoing diagnostic and control efforts made by malaria control programmes in the long term, as the National Centre of Tropical Medicine currently supports the National Programme against Malaria of Equatorial Guinea to perform all of the molecular studies necessary for disease control. Taking into account the results obtained with the RDTs, an exhaustive study of the deletion of the hrp2 gene must be done in EG to help choose the correct RDT for this area.
eng
Diagnosis
Malaria
Microscopy
RDTs
SnM-PCR
Comparison of three diagnostic methods (microscopy, RDT, and PCR) for the detection of malaria parasites in representative samples from Equatorial Guinea
journal article
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
URL
https://repisalud.isciii.es/bitstream/20.500.12105/7617/1/ComparisonOfThreeDiagnostic_2018.pdf
File
MD5
b5853c1a617478b8532052066d9c6ce6
1242284
application/pdf
ComparisonOfThreeDiagnostic_2018.pdf
URL
https://repisalud.isciii.es/bitstream/20.500.12105/7617/3/ComparisonOfThreeDiagnostic_2018.pdf.txt
File
MD5
0c7792bc9227a5ca1958bffe9c58ac8e
52033
text/plain
ComparisonOfThreeDiagnostic_2018.pdf.txt