Cargando…
Standardisation of lymphatic filariasis microfilaraemia prevalence estimates based on different diagnostic methods: a systematic review and meta-analysis
BACKGROUND: Lymphatic filariasis (LF) infection is generally diagnosed through parasitological identification of microfilariae (mf) in the blood. Although historically the most commonly used technique for counting mf is the thick blood smear based on 20 µl blood (TBS20), various other techniques and...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7288683/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32527335 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13071-020-04144-9 |
_version_ | 1783545323474386944 |
---|---|
author | Vinkeles Melchers, Natalie V. S. Coffeng, Luc E. de Vlas, Sake J. Stolk, Wilma A. |
author_facet | Vinkeles Melchers, Natalie V. S. Coffeng, Luc E. de Vlas, Sake J. Stolk, Wilma A. |
author_sort | Vinkeles Melchers, Natalie V. S. |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Lymphatic filariasis (LF) infection is generally diagnosed through parasitological identification of microfilariae (mf) in the blood. Although historically the most commonly used technique for counting mf is the thick blood smear based on 20 µl blood (TBS20), various other techniques and blood volumes have been applied. It is therefore a challenge to compare mf prevalence estimates from different LF-survey data. Our objective was to standardise microfilaraemia (mf) prevalence estimates to TBS20 as the reference diagnostic technique. METHODS: We first performed a systematic review to identify studies reporting on comparative mf prevalence data as measured by more than one diagnostic test, including TBS20, on the same study population. Associations between mf prevalences based on different diagnostic techniques were quantified in terms of odds ratios (OR, with TBS20 blood as reference), using a meta-regression model. RESULTS: We identified 606 articles matching our search strategy and included 14 in our analyses. The OR of the mf prevalences as measured by the more sensitive counting chamber technique (≥ 50 µl blood) was 2.90 (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.60–5.28). For membrane filtration (1 ml blood) the OR was 2.39 (95% CI: 1.62–3.53), Knott’s technique it was 1.54 (95% CI: 0.72–3.29), and for TBS in ≥ 40 µl blood it was 1.37 (95% CI: 0.81–2.30). CONCLUSIONS: We provided transformation factors to standardise mf prevalence estimates as detected by different diagnostic techniques to mf prevalence estimates as measured by TBS20. This will facilitate the use and comparison of more datasets in meta-analyses and geographic mapping initiatives across countries and over time. [Image: see text] |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7288683 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-72886832020-06-12 Standardisation of lymphatic filariasis microfilaraemia prevalence estimates based on different diagnostic methods: a systematic review and meta-analysis Vinkeles Melchers, Natalie V. S. Coffeng, Luc E. de Vlas, Sake J. Stolk, Wilma A. Parasit Vectors Research BACKGROUND: Lymphatic filariasis (LF) infection is generally diagnosed through parasitological identification of microfilariae (mf) in the blood. Although historically the most commonly used technique for counting mf is the thick blood smear based on 20 µl blood (TBS20), various other techniques and blood volumes have been applied. It is therefore a challenge to compare mf prevalence estimates from different LF-survey data. Our objective was to standardise microfilaraemia (mf) prevalence estimates to TBS20 as the reference diagnostic technique. METHODS: We first performed a systematic review to identify studies reporting on comparative mf prevalence data as measured by more than one diagnostic test, including TBS20, on the same study population. Associations between mf prevalences based on different diagnostic techniques were quantified in terms of odds ratios (OR, with TBS20 blood as reference), using a meta-regression model. RESULTS: We identified 606 articles matching our search strategy and included 14 in our analyses. The OR of the mf prevalences as measured by the more sensitive counting chamber technique (≥ 50 µl blood) was 2.90 (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.60–5.28). For membrane filtration (1 ml blood) the OR was 2.39 (95% CI: 1.62–3.53), Knott’s technique it was 1.54 (95% CI: 0.72–3.29), and for TBS in ≥ 40 µl blood it was 1.37 (95% CI: 0.81–2.30). CONCLUSIONS: We provided transformation factors to standardise mf prevalence estimates as detected by different diagnostic techniques to mf prevalence estimates as measured by TBS20. This will facilitate the use and comparison of more datasets in meta-analyses and geographic mapping initiatives across countries and over time. [Image: see text] BioMed Central 2020-06-11 /pmc/articles/PMC7288683/ /pubmed/32527335 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13071-020-04144-9 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Vinkeles Melchers, Natalie V. S. Coffeng, Luc E. de Vlas, Sake J. Stolk, Wilma A. Standardisation of lymphatic filariasis microfilaraemia prevalence estimates based on different diagnostic methods: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title | Standardisation of lymphatic filariasis microfilaraemia prevalence estimates based on different diagnostic methods: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_full | Standardisation of lymphatic filariasis microfilaraemia prevalence estimates based on different diagnostic methods: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_fullStr | Standardisation of lymphatic filariasis microfilaraemia prevalence estimates based on different diagnostic methods: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_full_unstemmed | Standardisation of lymphatic filariasis microfilaraemia prevalence estimates based on different diagnostic methods: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_short | Standardisation of lymphatic filariasis microfilaraemia prevalence estimates based on different diagnostic methods: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_sort | standardisation of lymphatic filariasis microfilaraemia prevalence estimates based on different diagnostic methods: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7288683/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32527335 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13071-020-04144-9 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT vinkelesmelchersnatalievs standardisationoflymphaticfilariasismicrofilaraemiaprevalenceestimatesbasedondifferentdiagnosticmethodsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT coffengluce standardisationoflymphaticfilariasismicrofilaraemiaprevalenceestimatesbasedondifferentdiagnosticmethodsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT devlassakej standardisationoflymphaticfilariasismicrofilaraemiaprevalenceestimatesbasedondifferentdiagnosticmethodsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT stolkwilmaa standardisationoflymphaticfilariasismicrofilaraemiaprevalenceestimatesbasedondifferentdiagnosticmethodsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis |