Performance of pfHRP2 versus pLDH antigen rapid diagnostic tests for the detection of Plasmodium falciparum: a systematic review and meta-analysis

pfHRP2 与 pLDH 抗原快速诊断检测恶性疟原虫的性能比较:系统评价和荟萃分析

阅读:1

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: There have been many inconsistent reports about the performance of histidine-rich protein 2 (HRP2) and lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) antigens as rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) for the diagnosis of past Plasmodium falciparum infections. This meta-analysis was performed to determine the performance of pfHRP2 versus pLDH antigen RDTs in the detection of P. falciparum. MATERIAL AND METHODS: After a systematic review of related studies, Meta-DiSc 1.4 software was used to calculate the pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR). Forest plots and summary receiver operating characteristic curve (SROC) analysis were used to summarize the overall test performance. RESULTS: Fourteen studies which met the inclusion criteria were included in the meta-analysis. The summary performances for pfHRP2- and pLDH-based tests in the diagnosis of P. falciparum infections were as follows: pooled sensitivity, 96.3% (95.8-96.7%) vs. 82.6% (81.7-83.5%); specificity, 86.1% (85.3-86.8%) vs. 95.9% (95.4-96.3%); diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), 243.31 (97.679-606.08) vs. 230.59 (114.98-462.42); and area under ROCs, 0.9822 versus 0.9849 (all p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The two RDTs performed satisfactorily for the diagnosis of P. falciparum, but the pLDH tests had higher specificity, whereas the pfHRP2 tests had better sensitivity. The pfHRP2 tests had slightly greater accuracy compared to the pLDH tests. A combination of both antigens might be a more reliable approach for the diagnosis of malaria.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。