Multiplex real-time PCR for diagnosing malaria in a non-endemic setting: a prospective comparison to conventional methods

Almost a decade ago our diagnostic laboratory implemented an in-house real-time PCR for the detection of Plasmodium DNA to diagnose malaria in parallel with conventional diagnostics, i.e., microscopy (thick and thin smears), quantitative buffy coat microscopy (QBC), and a rapid diagnostic test (RDT)...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases 2018-12, Vol.37 (12), p.2323-2329
Hauptverfasser: Nijhuis, R. H. T., van Lieshout, L., Verweij, J. J., Claas, E. C. J., Wessels, E.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 2329
container_issue 12
container_start_page 2323
container_title European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases
container_volume 37
creator Nijhuis, R. H. T.
van Lieshout, L.
Verweij, J. J.
Claas, E. C. J.
Wessels, E.
description Almost a decade ago our diagnostic laboratory implemented an in-house real-time PCR for the detection of Plasmodium DNA to diagnose malaria in parallel with conventional diagnostics, i.e., microscopy (thick and thin smears), quantitative buffy coat microscopy (QBC), and a rapid diagnostic test (RDT). Here we report our experiences and make a comparison between the different diagnostic procedures used in this non-endemic setting. All patients during the period February 2009–December 2017 suspected of malaria were prospectively tested at the moment of sample collection. Both PCR and conventional malaria diagnostics were carried out on a total of 839 specimens from 825 patients. In addition, three Plasmodium falciparum (Pf) patients were closely followed by real-time PCR and microscopy after treatment. Overall, 56 samples (55 patients) tested positive by real-time PCR, of which six were missed by microscopy and seven by QBC. RDT showed fairly good results in detecting Pf, whereas specificity was not optimal. RDT failed to detect 10 of 17 non-Pf PCR positive specimens. One Plasmodium malariae patient would have been missed if only conventional diagnostic tests had been used. The high sensitivity of the PCR was confirmed by the number of PCR positive, microscopy negative post-treatment samples. In conclusion, within our routine diagnostic setting, malaria real-time PCR not only showed a high level of agreement with the conventional methods used, but also showed higher sensitivity and better specificity. Still, for complete replacement of the conventional procedures in a non-endemic setting, the time-to-results of the real-time PCR is currently too long.
doi_str_mv 10.1007/s10096-018-3378-4
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2113270325</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2113270325</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c481t-3b973ee05f399585a99ecbf8fbe6d78eeccb053199af7cd08e49700ce67d89ad3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kU9rFTEUxYNY7Gv1A7iRgBs3sfk3L4k7edhWqCii65DJ3HmmzCRjkin225vnqwqCmxtu8jvn3nAQes7oa0apuiitmi2hTBMhlCbyEdowKToihRKP0YYaIYlRXJyis1JuadNopZ6gU0F5ZziTG3T_YZ1qWCb4gTO4idQwA_60-4zHlPEQ3D6mEuIez25yOTgcInY4pkggDjAHjwvU2oA37XrJqSzga7gD7NO8NEFJEdfUungHsYYU3YRnqN_SUJ6ik9FNBZ49nOfo6-W7L7trcvPx6v3u7Q3xUrNKRG-UAKDdKIzpdOeMAd-PeuxhOygN4H1PO8GMcaPyA9UgjaLUw1YN2rhBnKNXR9-23vcVSrVzKB6myUVIa7GcMcEVFbxr6Mt_0Nu05rbzL4pLbjolG8WOlG__LRlGu-Qwu3xvGbWHXOwxF9tysYdc7EHz4sF57WcY_ih-B9EAfgRKe4p7yH9H_9_1JyVdme4</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2112429574</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Multiplex real-time PCR for diagnosing malaria in a non-endemic setting: a prospective comparison to conventional methods</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Springer Nature - Complete Springer Journals</source><creator>Nijhuis, R. H. T. ; van Lieshout, L. ; Verweij, J. J. ; Claas, E. C. J. ; Wessels, E.</creator><creatorcontrib>Nijhuis, R. H. T. ; van Lieshout, L. ; Verweij, J. J. ; Claas, E. C. J. ; Wessels, E.</creatorcontrib><description>Almost a decade ago our diagnostic laboratory implemented an in-house real-time PCR for the detection of Plasmodium DNA to diagnose malaria in parallel with conventional diagnostics, i.e., microscopy (thick and thin smears), quantitative buffy coat microscopy (QBC), and a rapid diagnostic test (RDT). Here we report our experiences and make a comparison between the different diagnostic procedures used in this non-endemic setting. All patients during the period February 2009–December 2017 suspected of malaria were prospectively tested at the moment of sample collection. Both PCR and conventional malaria diagnostics were carried out on a total of 839 specimens from 825 patients. In addition, three Plasmodium falciparum (Pf) patients were closely followed by real-time PCR and microscopy after treatment. Overall, 56 samples (55 patients) tested positive by real-time PCR, of which six were missed by microscopy and seven by QBC. RDT showed fairly good results in detecting Pf, whereas specificity was not optimal. RDT failed to detect 10 of 17 non-Pf PCR positive specimens. One Plasmodium malariae patient would have been missed if only conventional diagnostic tests had been used. The high sensitivity of the PCR was confirmed by the number of PCR positive, microscopy negative post-treatment samples. In conclusion, within our routine diagnostic setting, malaria real-time PCR not only showed a high level of agreement with the conventional methods used, but also showed higher sensitivity and better specificity. Still, for complete replacement of the conventional procedures in a non-endemic setting, the time-to-results of the real-time PCR is currently too long.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0934-9723</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1435-4373</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s10096-018-3378-4</identifier><identifier>PMID: 30259214</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg</publisher><subject>Antigens, Protozoan - genetics ; Biomedical and Life Sciences ; Biomedicine ; Buffy coat ; Deoxyribonucleic acid ; Diagnostic systems ; DNA ; Humans ; Internal Medicine ; Malaria ; Malaria - diagnosis ; Medical Microbiology ; Microscopy ; Multiplex Polymerase Chain Reaction ; Netherlands ; Original Article ; Patients ; Plasmodium ; Plasmodium falciparum ; Polymerase chain reaction ; Prospective Studies ; Real time ; Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction ; Sensitivity ; Sensitivity and Specificity ; Travel Medicine ; Vector-borne diseases</subject><ispartof>European journal of clinical microbiology &amp; infectious diseases, 2018-12, Vol.37 (12), p.2323-2329</ispartof><rights>The Author(s) 2018</rights><rights>European Journal of Clinical Microbiology &amp; Infectious Diseases is a copyright of Springer, (2018). All Rights Reserved. © 2018. This work is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c481t-3b973ee05f399585a99ecbf8fbe6d78eeccb053199af7cd08e49700ce67d89ad3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c481t-3b973ee05f399585a99ecbf8fbe6d78eeccb053199af7cd08e49700ce67d89ad3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10096-018-3378-4$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10096-018-3378-4$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27901,27902,41464,42533,51294</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30259214$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Nijhuis, R. H. T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>van Lieshout, L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Verweij, J. J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Claas, E. C. J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wessels, E.</creatorcontrib><title>Multiplex real-time PCR for diagnosing malaria in a non-endemic setting: a prospective comparison to conventional methods</title><title>European journal of clinical microbiology &amp; infectious diseases</title><addtitle>Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis</addtitle><addtitle>Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis</addtitle><description>Almost a decade ago our diagnostic laboratory implemented an in-house real-time PCR for the detection of Plasmodium DNA to diagnose malaria in parallel with conventional diagnostics, i.e., microscopy (thick and thin smears), quantitative buffy coat microscopy (QBC), and a rapid diagnostic test (RDT). Here we report our experiences and make a comparison between the different diagnostic procedures used in this non-endemic setting. All patients during the period February 2009–December 2017 suspected of malaria were prospectively tested at the moment of sample collection. Both PCR and conventional malaria diagnostics were carried out on a total of 839 specimens from 825 patients. In addition, three Plasmodium falciparum (Pf) patients were closely followed by real-time PCR and microscopy after treatment. Overall, 56 samples (55 patients) tested positive by real-time PCR, of which six were missed by microscopy and seven by QBC. RDT showed fairly good results in detecting Pf, whereas specificity was not optimal. RDT failed to detect 10 of 17 non-Pf PCR positive specimens. One Plasmodium malariae patient would have been missed if only conventional diagnostic tests had been used. The high sensitivity of the PCR was confirmed by the number of PCR positive, microscopy negative post-treatment samples. In conclusion, within our routine diagnostic setting, malaria real-time PCR not only showed a high level of agreement with the conventional methods used, but also showed higher sensitivity and better specificity. Still, for complete replacement of the conventional procedures in a non-endemic setting, the time-to-results of the real-time PCR is currently too long.</description><subject>Antigens, Protozoan - genetics</subject><subject>Biomedical and Life Sciences</subject><subject>Biomedicine</subject><subject>Buffy coat</subject><subject>Deoxyribonucleic acid</subject><subject>Diagnostic systems</subject><subject>DNA</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Internal Medicine</subject><subject>Malaria</subject><subject>Malaria - diagnosis</subject><subject>Medical Microbiology</subject><subject>Microscopy</subject><subject>Multiplex Polymerase Chain Reaction</subject><subject>Netherlands</subject><subject>Original Article</subject><subject>Patients</subject><subject>Plasmodium</subject><subject>Plasmodium falciparum</subject><subject>Polymerase chain reaction</subject><subject>Prospective Studies</subject><subject>Real time</subject><subject>Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction</subject><subject>Sensitivity</subject><subject>Sensitivity and Specificity</subject><subject>Travel Medicine</subject><subject>Vector-borne diseases</subject><issn>0934-9723</issn><issn>1435-4373</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2018</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>C6C</sourceid><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kU9rFTEUxYNY7Gv1A7iRgBs3sfk3L4k7edhWqCii65DJ3HmmzCRjkin225vnqwqCmxtu8jvn3nAQes7oa0apuiitmi2hTBMhlCbyEdowKToihRKP0YYaIYlRXJyis1JuadNopZ6gU0F5ZziTG3T_YZ1qWCb4gTO4idQwA_60-4zHlPEQ3D6mEuIez25yOTgcInY4pkggDjAHjwvU2oA37XrJqSzga7gD7NO8NEFJEdfUungHsYYU3YRnqN_SUJ6ik9FNBZ49nOfo6-W7L7trcvPx6v3u7Q3xUrNKRG-UAKDdKIzpdOeMAd-PeuxhOygN4H1PO8GMcaPyA9UgjaLUw1YN2rhBnKNXR9-23vcVSrVzKB6myUVIa7GcMcEVFbxr6Mt_0Nu05rbzL4pLbjolG8WOlG__LRlGu-Qwu3xvGbWHXOwxF9tysYdc7EHz4sF57WcY_ih-B9EAfgRKe4p7yH9H_9_1JyVdme4</recordid><startdate>20181201</startdate><enddate>20181201</enddate><creator>Nijhuis, R. H. T.</creator><creator>van Lieshout, L.</creator><creator>Verweij, J. J.</creator><creator>Claas, E. C. J.</creator><creator>Wessels, E.</creator><general>Springer Berlin Heidelberg</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>C6C</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QL</scope><scope>7U9</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88A</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AEUYN</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20181201</creationdate><title>Multiplex real-time PCR for diagnosing malaria in a non-endemic setting: a prospective comparison to conventional methods</title><author>Nijhuis, R. H. T. ; van Lieshout, L. ; Verweij, J. J. ; Claas, E. C. J. ; Wessels, E.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c481t-3b973ee05f399585a99ecbf8fbe6d78eeccb053199af7cd08e49700ce67d89ad3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2018</creationdate><topic>Antigens, Protozoan - genetics</topic><topic>Biomedical and Life Sciences</topic><topic>Biomedicine</topic><topic>Buffy coat</topic><topic>Deoxyribonucleic acid</topic><topic>Diagnostic systems</topic><topic>DNA</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Internal Medicine</topic><topic>Malaria</topic><topic>Malaria - diagnosis</topic><topic>Medical Microbiology</topic><topic>Microscopy</topic><topic>Multiplex Polymerase Chain Reaction</topic><topic>Netherlands</topic><topic>Original Article</topic><topic>Patients</topic><topic>Plasmodium</topic><topic>Plasmodium falciparum</topic><topic>Polymerase chain reaction</topic><topic>Prospective Studies</topic><topic>Real time</topic><topic>Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction</topic><topic>Sensitivity</topic><topic>Sensitivity and Specificity</topic><topic>Travel Medicine</topic><topic>Vector-borne diseases</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Nijhuis, R. H. T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>van Lieshout, L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Verweij, J. J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Claas, E. C. J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wessels, E.</creatorcontrib><collection>Springer Nature OA Free Journals</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Bacteriology Abstracts (Microbiology B)</collection><collection>Virology and AIDS Abstracts</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Biology Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Sustainability</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>European journal of clinical microbiology &amp; infectious diseases</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Nijhuis, R. H. T.</au><au>van Lieshout, L.</au><au>Verweij, J. J.</au><au>Claas, E. C. J.</au><au>Wessels, E.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Multiplex real-time PCR for diagnosing malaria in a non-endemic setting: a prospective comparison to conventional methods</atitle><jtitle>European journal of clinical microbiology &amp; infectious diseases</jtitle><stitle>Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis</stitle><addtitle>Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis</addtitle><date>2018-12-01</date><risdate>2018</risdate><volume>37</volume><issue>12</issue><spage>2323</spage><epage>2329</epage><pages>2323-2329</pages><issn>0934-9723</issn><eissn>1435-4373</eissn><abstract>Almost a decade ago our diagnostic laboratory implemented an in-house real-time PCR for the detection of Plasmodium DNA to diagnose malaria in parallel with conventional diagnostics, i.e., microscopy (thick and thin smears), quantitative buffy coat microscopy (QBC), and a rapid diagnostic test (RDT). Here we report our experiences and make a comparison between the different diagnostic procedures used in this non-endemic setting. All patients during the period February 2009–December 2017 suspected of malaria were prospectively tested at the moment of sample collection. Both PCR and conventional malaria diagnostics were carried out on a total of 839 specimens from 825 patients. In addition, three Plasmodium falciparum (Pf) patients were closely followed by real-time PCR and microscopy after treatment. Overall, 56 samples (55 patients) tested positive by real-time PCR, of which six were missed by microscopy and seven by QBC. RDT showed fairly good results in detecting Pf, whereas specificity was not optimal. RDT failed to detect 10 of 17 non-Pf PCR positive specimens. One Plasmodium malariae patient would have been missed if only conventional diagnostic tests had been used. The high sensitivity of the PCR was confirmed by the number of PCR positive, microscopy negative post-treatment samples. In conclusion, within our routine diagnostic setting, malaria real-time PCR not only showed a high level of agreement with the conventional methods used, but also showed higher sensitivity and better specificity. Still, for complete replacement of the conventional procedures in a non-endemic setting, the time-to-results of the real-time PCR is currently too long.</abstract><cop>Berlin/Heidelberg</cop><pub>Springer Berlin Heidelberg</pub><pmid>30259214</pmid><doi>10.1007/s10096-018-3378-4</doi><tpages>7</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0934-9723
ispartof European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases, 2018-12, Vol.37 (12), p.2323-2329
issn 0934-9723
1435-4373
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2113270325
source MEDLINE; Springer Nature - Complete Springer Journals
subjects Antigens, Protozoan - genetics
Biomedical and Life Sciences
Biomedicine
Buffy coat
Deoxyribonucleic acid
Diagnostic systems
DNA
Humans
Internal Medicine
Malaria
Malaria - diagnosis
Medical Microbiology
Microscopy
Multiplex Polymerase Chain Reaction
Netherlands
Original Article
Patients
Plasmodium
Plasmodium falciparum
Polymerase chain reaction
Prospective Studies
Real time
Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction
Sensitivity
Sensitivity and Specificity
Travel Medicine
Vector-borne diseases
title Multiplex real-time PCR for diagnosing malaria in a non-endemic setting: a prospective comparison to conventional methods
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-01T01%3A47%3A09IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Multiplex%20real-time%20PCR%20for%20diagnosing%20malaria%20in%20a%20non-endemic%20setting:%20a%20prospective%20comparison%20to%20conventional%20methods&rft.jtitle=European%20journal%20of%20clinical%20microbiology%20&%20infectious%20diseases&rft.au=Nijhuis,%20R.%20H.%20T.&rft.date=2018-12-01&rft.volume=37&rft.issue=12&rft.spage=2323&rft.epage=2329&rft.pages=2323-2329&rft.issn=0934-9723&rft.eissn=1435-4373&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s10096-018-3378-4&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2113270325%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2112429574&rft_id=info:pmid/30259214&rfr_iscdi=true