Charles Darwin University

CDU eSpace
Institutional Repository

 
CDU Staff and Student only
 

A systematic review of sub-microscopic Plasmodium vivax infection

Moreira, Clarissa M., Abo-Shehada, Mahmoud, Price, Ric N. and Drakeley, Chris J. (2015). A systematic review of sub-microscopic Plasmodium vivax infection. Malaria Journal,14(Article No. 360).

Document type: Journal Article
Citation counts: Altmetric Score Altmetric Score is 2
Google Scholar Search Google Scholar
Attached Files (Some files may be inaccessible until you login with your CDU eSpace credentials)
Name Description MIMEType Size Downloads
Download this reading Price_59155.pdf Published version application/pdf 2.49MB 7
Reading the attached file works best in Firefox, Chrome and IE 9 or later.

IRMA ID 11381xPUB172
Title A systematic review of sub-microscopic Plasmodium vivax infection
Author Moreira, Clarissa M.
Abo-Shehada, Mahmoud
Price, Ric N.
Drakeley, Chris J.
Journal Name Malaria Journal
Publication Date 2015
Volume Number 14
Issue Number Article No. 360
ISSN 1475-2875   (check CDU catalogue  open catalogue search in new window)
Scopus ID 2-s2.0-84959338824
Total Pages 10
Place of Publication United Kingdom
Publisher BioMed Central Ltd.
HERDC Category C1 - Journal Article (DIISR)
Abstract Background
An accurate estimate of Plasmodium vivax prevalence is essential for the successful implementation of malaria control and elimination programmes. Prevalence estimates both inform control strategies and are used in their evaluation. Light microscopy is the main method for detecting Plasmodium parasitaemia in the peripheral blood, but compared to molecular diagnostics, such as polymerase chain reaction (PCR), has limited sensitivity.

Methods

A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to assess the effect of detection method on the prevalence of P. vivax and to quantify the extent to which P. vivax infections are undetected by microscopy. Embase, Medline and the Cochrane Database were searched for studies reporting prevalence by PCR and by microscopy and that contained all of the following key words: vivax, PCR, and malaria. Prevalence estimates and study meta-data were extracted systematically from each publication. Combined microscopy:PCR prevalence ratios were estimated by random effects meta-analysis. Sensitivity and specificity of microscopy were calculated using PCR as the gold standard.

Results

Of 874 studies reviewed, 40 met the criteria for inclusion contributing 54 prevalence pairs. The prevalence of P. vivax infection measured by PCR was consistently higher than the prevalence measured by microscopy with sub-patent parasitaemia. The mean prevalence of infection detected by microscopy was 67 % (95 % CI 59–73 %) lower than the prevalence detected by PCR. The detection of sub-patent parasitaemia did not vary according to the microscopy method (thick or, thick and thin smears), the PCR prevalence (as a measure of the true P. vivax prevalence), the type of blood used or DNA extraction method.

Conclusions
Quantifying P. vivax parasitaemia by PCR rather than microscopy consistently increased prevalence estimates by a factor of 2.3. Whilst the sensitivity of microscopy can be improved by better methods, molecular methods have potential to be scaled up to improve the detection of P. vivax transmission reservoirs.
Keywords Malaria
Plasmodium vivax
Polymerase chain reaction
Microscopy
Diagnostics
Prevalance
DOI http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12936-015-0884-z   (check subscription with CDU E-Gateway service for CDU Staff and Students  check subscription with CDU E-Gateway in new window)
Additional Notes This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Description for Link Link to CC Attribution 4.0 License
URL https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/au


© copyright

Every reasonable effort has been made to ensure that permission has been obtained for items included in CDU eSpace. If you believe that your rights have been infringed by this repository, please contact digitisation@cdu.edu.au.

 
Versions
Version Filter Type
Access Statistics: 6 Abstract Views, 7 File Downloads  -  Detailed Statistics
Created: Tue, 26 Jul 2016, 12:48:32 CST