Cargando…
Assessing field performance of ultrasensitive rapid diagnostic tests for malaria: a systematic review and meta-analysis
BACKGROUND: To overcome the limitations of conventional malaria rapid diagnostic tests (cRDTs) in diagnosing malaria in patients with low parasitaemia, ultrasensitive malaria rapid diagnostic tests (uRDTs) have recently been developed, with promising results under laboratory conditions. The current...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8176703/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34082776 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12936-021-03783-2 |
_version_ | 1783703300231659520 |
---|---|
author | Danwang, Celestin Kirakoya-Samadoulougou, Fati Samadoulougou, Sekou |
author_facet | Danwang, Celestin Kirakoya-Samadoulougou, Fati Samadoulougou, Sekou |
author_sort | Danwang, Celestin |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: To overcome the limitations of conventional malaria rapid diagnostic tests (cRDTs) in diagnosing malaria in patients with low parasitaemia, ultrasensitive malaria rapid diagnostic tests (uRDTs) have recently been developed, with promising results under laboratory conditions. The current study is the first meta-analysis comparing the overall sensitivity, and specificity of newly developed ultrasensitive Plasmodium falciparum malaria RDT (Alere™ Ultra-sensitive Malaria Ag P. falciparum RDT) with the cRDT conducted in the same field conditions. METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane infectious diseases group specialized register, and African Journals Online (AJOL) were searched up to 20(th) April 2021. Studies with enough data to compute sensitivity and specificity of uRDT and cRDT were retrieved. A random-effect model for meta-analysis was used to obtain the pooled sensitivity and specificity. RESULTS: Overall, 15 data sets from 14 studies were included in the meta-analysis. The overall sensitivity of the Alere™ ultra-sensitive Malaria Ag P. falciparum RDT regardless of the reference test and the clinical presentation of participants, was 55.5% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 45.5; 65.0), while the sensitivity regardless of the reference test and the clinical presentation of participants, was 42.9% (95% CI: 31.5; 55.2) for the cRDT performed in the same field conditions. When PCR was used as reference test, the sensitivity of uRDT was 60.4% (95% CI: 50.8; 69.2), while the sensitivity was 49.4% (95% CI: 38.2; 60.6) for the cRDT. The pooled specificity of uRDT regardless of the reference test and the clinical presentation of participants was 98.6% (95% CI: 97.1; 99.4), and the pooled specificity of cRDT regardless of the reference test and the clinical presentation of participants was 99.3% (95% CI: 98.1; 99.7). When PCR was used as reference test the specificity of uRDT and cRDT was 97.5% (95% CI: 94.1; 98.9) and 98.2% (95% CI: 95.5; 99.3). Regardless of the reference test used, the sensitivity of Alere™ Ultra-sensitive Malaria Ag P. falciparum RDT in symptomatic patients was 72.1% (95%CI: 67.4; 76.4), while sensitivity of cRDT was 67.4% (95%CI: 57.6; 75.9). CONCLUSION: Findings of the meta-analysis show that Alere™ Ultra-sensitive Malaria Ag P. falciparum RDT compared to cRDT performed in the same field conditions has higher sensitivity but lower specificity although the difference is not statistically significant. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12936-021-03783-2. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8176703 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-81767032021-06-04 Assessing field performance of ultrasensitive rapid diagnostic tests for malaria: a systematic review and meta-analysis Danwang, Celestin Kirakoya-Samadoulougou, Fati Samadoulougou, Sekou Malar J Research BACKGROUND: To overcome the limitations of conventional malaria rapid diagnostic tests (cRDTs) in diagnosing malaria in patients with low parasitaemia, ultrasensitive malaria rapid diagnostic tests (uRDTs) have recently been developed, with promising results under laboratory conditions. The current study is the first meta-analysis comparing the overall sensitivity, and specificity of newly developed ultrasensitive Plasmodium falciparum malaria RDT (Alere™ Ultra-sensitive Malaria Ag P. falciparum RDT) with the cRDT conducted in the same field conditions. METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane infectious diseases group specialized register, and African Journals Online (AJOL) were searched up to 20(th) April 2021. Studies with enough data to compute sensitivity and specificity of uRDT and cRDT were retrieved. A random-effect model for meta-analysis was used to obtain the pooled sensitivity and specificity. RESULTS: Overall, 15 data sets from 14 studies were included in the meta-analysis. The overall sensitivity of the Alere™ ultra-sensitive Malaria Ag P. falciparum RDT regardless of the reference test and the clinical presentation of participants, was 55.5% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 45.5; 65.0), while the sensitivity regardless of the reference test and the clinical presentation of participants, was 42.9% (95% CI: 31.5; 55.2) for the cRDT performed in the same field conditions. When PCR was used as reference test, the sensitivity of uRDT was 60.4% (95% CI: 50.8; 69.2), while the sensitivity was 49.4% (95% CI: 38.2; 60.6) for the cRDT. The pooled specificity of uRDT regardless of the reference test and the clinical presentation of participants was 98.6% (95% CI: 97.1; 99.4), and the pooled specificity of cRDT regardless of the reference test and the clinical presentation of participants was 99.3% (95% CI: 98.1; 99.7). When PCR was used as reference test the specificity of uRDT and cRDT was 97.5% (95% CI: 94.1; 98.9) and 98.2% (95% CI: 95.5; 99.3). Regardless of the reference test used, the sensitivity of Alere™ Ultra-sensitive Malaria Ag P. falciparum RDT in symptomatic patients was 72.1% (95%CI: 67.4; 76.4), while sensitivity of cRDT was 67.4% (95%CI: 57.6; 75.9). CONCLUSION: Findings of the meta-analysis show that Alere™ Ultra-sensitive Malaria Ag P. falciparum RDT compared to cRDT performed in the same field conditions has higher sensitivity but lower specificity although the difference is not statistically significant. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12936-021-03783-2. BioMed Central 2021-06-03 /pmc/articles/PMC8176703/ /pubmed/34082776 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12936-021-03783-2 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/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/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://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 Danwang, Celestin Kirakoya-Samadoulougou, Fati Samadoulougou, Sekou Assessing field performance of ultrasensitive rapid diagnostic tests for malaria: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title | Assessing field performance of ultrasensitive rapid diagnostic tests for malaria: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_full | Assessing field performance of ultrasensitive rapid diagnostic tests for malaria: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_fullStr | Assessing field performance of ultrasensitive rapid diagnostic tests for malaria: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_full_unstemmed | Assessing field performance of ultrasensitive rapid diagnostic tests for malaria: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_short | Assessing field performance of ultrasensitive rapid diagnostic tests for malaria: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_sort | assessing field performance of ultrasensitive rapid diagnostic tests for malaria: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8176703/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34082776 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12936-021-03783-2 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT danwangcelestin assessingfieldperformanceofultrasensitiverapiddiagnostictestsformalariaasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT kirakoyasamadoulougoufati assessingfieldperformanceofultrasensitiverapiddiagnostictestsformalariaasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT samadoulougousekou assessingfieldperformanceofultrasensitiverapiddiagnostictestsformalariaasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis |