Cargando…

Cholera diagnosis in human stool and detection in water: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND: Cholera continues to pose a problem for low-resource, fragile and humanitarian contexts. Evidence suggests that 2.86 million cholera cases and 95,000 deaths due to cholera are reported annually. Without quick and effective diagnosis and treatment, case-fatality may be 50%. In line with t...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Falconer, Jennifer, Diaconu, Karin, O’May, Fiona, Gummaraju, Advaith, Victor-Uadiale, Ifeyinwa, Matragrano, Joseph, Njanpop-Lafourcade, Berthe-Marie, Ager, Alastair
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9258865/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35793330
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0270860
_version_ 1784741644939034624
author Falconer, Jennifer
Diaconu, Karin
O’May, Fiona
Gummaraju, Advaith
Victor-Uadiale, Ifeyinwa
Matragrano, Joseph
Njanpop-Lafourcade, Berthe-Marie
Ager, Alastair
author_facet Falconer, Jennifer
Diaconu, Karin
O’May, Fiona
Gummaraju, Advaith
Victor-Uadiale, Ifeyinwa
Matragrano, Joseph
Njanpop-Lafourcade, Berthe-Marie
Ager, Alastair
author_sort Falconer, Jennifer
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Cholera continues to pose a problem for low-resource, fragile and humanitarian contexts. Evidence suggests that 2.86 million cholera cases and 95,000 deaths due to cholera are reported annually. Without quick and effective diagnosis and treatment, case-fatality may be 50%. In line with the priorities of the Global Task Force on Cholera Control, we undertook a systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy and other test characteristics of current tests for cholera detection in stool and water. METHODS: We searched 11 bibliographic and grey literature databases. Data was extracted on test sensitivity, specificity and other product information. Meta-analyses of sensitivity and specificity were conducted for tests reported in three or more studies. Where fewer studies reported a test, estimates were summarised through narrative synthesis. Risk of Bias was assessed using QUADAS-2. RESULTS: Searches identified 6,637 records; 41 studies reporting on 28 tests were included. Twenty-two tests had both sensitivities and specificities reported above 95% by at least one study, but there was, overall, wide variation in reported diagnostic accuracy across studies. For the three tests where meta-analyses were possible the highest sensitivity meta-estimate was found in the Cholera Screen test (98.6%, CI: 94.7%-99.7%) and the highest specificity meta-estimate in the Crystal VC on enriched samples (98.3%, CI: 92.8%-99.6%). There was a general lack of evidence regarding field use of tests, but where presented this indicated trends for lower diagnostic accuracy in field settings, with lesser-trained staff, and without the additional process of sample enrichment. Where reported, mean test turnaround times ranged from over 50% to 130% longer than manufacturer’s specification. Most studies had a low to unclear risk of bias. CONCLUSIONS: Currently available Rapid Diagnostic Tests can potentially provide high diagnostic and detection capability for cholera. However, stronger evidence is required regarding the conditions required to secure these levels of accuracy in field use, particularly in low-resource settings. REGISTRATION: PROSPERO (CRD42016048428).
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9258865
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-92588652022-07-07 Cholera diagnosis in human stool and detection in water: A systematic review and meta-analysis Falconer, Jennifer Diaconu, Karin O’May, Fiona Gummaraju, Advaith Victor-Uadiale, Ifeyinwa Matragrano, Joseph Njanpop-Lafourcade, Berthe-Marie Ager, Alastair PLoS One Research Article BACKGROUND: Cholera continues to pose a problem for low-resource, fragile and humanitarian contexts. Evidence suggests that 2.86 million cholera cases and 95,000 deaths due to cholera are reported annually. Without quick and effective diagnosis and treatment, case-fatality may be 50%. In line with the priorities of the Global Task Force on Cholera Control, we undertook a systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy and other test characteristics of current tests for cholera detection in stool and water. METHODS: We searched 11 bibliographic and grey literature databases. Data was extracted on test sensitivity, specificity and other product information. Meta-analyses of sensitivity and specificity were conducted for tests reported in three or more studies. Where fewer studies reported a test, estimates were summarised through narrative synthesis. Risk of Bias was assessed using QUADAS-2. RESULTS: Searches identified 6,637 records; 41 studies reporting on 28 tests were included. Twenty-two tests had both sensitivities and specificities reported above 95% by at least one study, but there was, overall, wide variation in reported diagnostic accuracy across studies. For the three tests where meta-analyses were possible the highest sensitivity meta-estimate was found in the Cholera Screen test (98.6%, CI: 94.7%-99.7%) and the highest specificity meta-estimate in the Crystal VC on enriched samples (98.3%, CI: 92.8%-99.6%). There was a general lack of evidence regarding field use of tests, but where presented this indicated trends for lower diagnostic accuracy in field settings, with lesser-trained staff, and without the additional process of sample enrichment. Where reported, mean test turnaround times ranged from over 50% to 130% longer than manufacturer’s specification. Most studies had a low to unclear risk of bias. CONCLUSIONS: Currently available Rapid Diagnostic Tests can potentially provide high diagnostic and detection capability for cholera. However, stronger evidence is required regarding the conditions required to secure these levels of accuracy in field use, particularly in low-resource settings. REGISTRATION: PROSPERO (CRD42016048428). Public Library of Science 2022-07-06 /pmc/articles/PMC9258865/ /pubmed/35793330 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0270860 Text en © 2022 Falconer et al https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Falconer, Jennifer
Diaconu, Karin
O’May, Fiona
Gummaraju, Advaith
Victor-Uadiale, Ifeyinwa
Matragrano, Joseph
Njanpop-Lafourcade, Berthe-Marie
Ager, Alastair
Cholera diagnosis in human stool and detection in water: A systematic review and meta-analysis
title Cholera diagnosis in human stool and detection in water: A systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full Cholera diagnosis in human stool and detection in water: A systematic review and meta-analysis
title_fullStr Cholera diagnosis in human stool and detection in water: A systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full_unstemmed Cholera diagnosis in human stool and detection in water: A systematic review and meta-analysis
title_short Cholera diagnosis in human stool and detection in water: A systematic review and meta-analysis
title_sort cholera diagnosis in human stool and detection in water: a systematic review and meta-analysis
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9258865/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35793330
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0270860
work_keys_str_mv AT falconerjennifer choleradiagnosisinhumanstoolanddetectioninwaterasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT diaconukarin choleradiagnosisinhumanstoolanddetectioninwaterasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT omayfiona choleradiagnosisinhumanstoolanddetectioninwaterasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT gummarajuadvaith choleradiagnosisinhumanstoolanddetectioninwaterasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT victoruadialeifeyinwa choleradiagnosisinhumanstoolanddetectioninwaterasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT matragranojoseph choleradiagnosisinhumanstoolanddetectioninwaterasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT njanpoplafourcadeberthemarie choleradiagnosisinhumanstoolanddetectioninwaterasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT ageralastair choleradiagnosisinhumanstoolanddetectioninwaterasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis