Natalia Erica Jahja1, Irene Ratridewi Huwae1, Mario B Nara2, Adinda Harley3, Tarina Widaningrum4, Loeki Enggar Fitri5. 1. Department of Pediatrics, Dr. Saiful Anwar Hospital/Faculty of Medicine, University of Brawijaya, Jalan J.A Suprapto No. 2 Malang, East Java 65141, Indonesia. 2. Department of Pediatrics, Dr. TC. Hillers Hospital, Jalan Wairklau Maumere, East Nusa Tenggara 86111, Indonesia. 3. Division of Infectious Diseases and Tropical Medicine, Medical Center of the University of Munich (LMU), Leopoldstrasse 5, 80802 Munich, German. 4. Laboratory of Biomedic, Faculty of Medicine, University of Brawijaya, Jalan Veteran Malang, East Java 65145, Indonesia. 5. Department of Parasitology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Brawijaya, Jalan Veteran Malang, East Java 65145, Indonesia.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Microscopic detection is the conventional method for detecting malaria parasites. Although it is efficient and inexpensive, it has its limitations. In recent years, polymeras chain reaction (PCR) has been considered superior to microscopy in detecting mixed Plasmodium infections or infections with low parasite density. To determine whether microscopic or nested PCR (nPCR) is better at detecting congenital malaria (CM). METHODS: Blood smear examination and nPCR were performed with blood samples taken from mothers and their newborns, who were likely to be suffering from CM and in whom one of the symptoms was low birth weight (LBW). The sensitivity and specificity of each method were then compared. RESULTS: During one year of study, the prevalence of CM among 92 LBW newborns was determined to be 6.8% using microscopy and 7.8% using nPCR. Among the 92 mother-infant paired subjects, CM was detected in 34 subjects (37%) by microscopy and in 39 subjects (42.4%) by nPCR. nPCR was more sensitive (76.5% vs 66.7%) but less specific (77.6% vs 84.9%) than microscopy. When the two methods were compared, nPCR gave significantly better results in diagnosing CM (AUC = 0.770; P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Although microscopy remains the most appropriate method for the diagnosis of CM in remote areas, nPCR can be considered a complementary test.
BACKGROUND: Microscopic detection is the conventional method for detecting malaria parasites. Although it is efficient and inexpensive, it has its limitations. In recent years, polymeras chain reaction (PCR) has been considered superior to microscopy in detecting mixed Plasmodium infections or infections with low parasite density. To determine whether microscopic or nested PCR (nPCR) is better at detecting congenital malaria (CM). METHODS: Blood smear examination and nPCR were performed with blood samples taken from mothers and their newborns, who were likely to be suffering from CM and in whom one of the symptoms was low birth weight (LBW). The sensitivity and specificity of each method were then compared. RESULTS: During one year of study, the prevalence of CM among 92 LBW newborns was determined to be 6.8% using microscopy and 7.8% using nPCR. Among the 92 mother-infant paired subjects, CM was detected in 34 subjects (37%) by microscopy and in 39 subjects (42.4%) by nPCR. nPCR was more sensitive (76.5% vs 66.7%) but less specific (77.6% vs 84.9%) than microscopy. When the two methods were compared, nPCR gave significantly better results in diagnosing CM (AUC = 0.770; P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Although microscopy remains the most appropriate method for the diagnosis of CM in remote areas, nPCR can be considered a complementary test.
Authors: Johanna H Kattenberg; Eleanor A Ochodo; Kimberly R Boer; Henk Dfh Schallig; Petra F Mens; Mariska Mg Leeflang Journal: Malar J Date: 2011-10-28 Impact factor: 2.979
Authors: Bruno B Andrade; Antonio Reis-Filho; Austeclino M Barros; Sebastião M Souza-Neto; Lucas L Nogueira; Kiyoshi F Fukutani; Erney P Camargo; Luís M A Camargo; Aldina Barral; Angelo Duarte; Manoel Barral-Netto Journal: Malar J Date: 2010-05-06 Impact factor: 2.979