| Literature DB >> 27875685 |
Diego R Falci1, Elias R Hoffmann2, Diego D Paskulin3, Alessandro C Pasqualotto4.
Abstract
The diagnosis of progressive disseminated histoplasmosis is often a challenge to clinicians, especially due to the low sensitivity and long turnaround time of the classic diagnostic methods. In recent years, studies involving a variety of non-culture-based diagnostic tests have been published in the literature. We performed a systematic review by selecting studies evaluating non-culture-based diagnostic methods for progressive disseminated histoplasmosis. We searched for articles evaluating detection of antibody, antigens, as well as DNA-based diagnostic methods. A comprehensive PUBMED, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library search was performed between the years 1956 and 2016. Case reports, review articles, non-human models and series involving less than 10 patients were excluded. We found 278 articles and after initial review 18 articles were included: (12) involved antigen detection methods, (4) molecular methods, and (2) antibody detection methods. Here we demonstrate that the pursuit of new technologies is ultimately required for the early and accurate diagnosis of disseminated histoplasmosis. In particular, urinary antigen detection was the most accurate tool when compared with other diagnostic techniques.Entities:
Keywords: Diagnostic tests; Disseminated histoplasmosis; Enzyme immunoassay; Non-culture
Mesh:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27875685 PMCID: PMC9425517 DOI: 10.1016/j.bjid.2016.09.012
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Braz J Infect Dis ISSN: 1413-8670 Impact factor: 3.257
Fig. 1Finding evidence for comparing diagnostic studies for progressive disseminated histoplasmosis.
Studies included in the systematic review.
| Reference | Method | Population studied | Main results | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Arango-Bustamante et al., 2013 | Serology (CF and ID) | 391 | HIV and non-HIV, PDH patients | Positivity non-HIV: CF 87%, ID 95%; HIV: CF 79%, ID 92% |
| Gerber et al., 1972 | Serology (CF and LA) | 70 | Acute, chronic pulmonary and PDH, individuals without histoplasmosis | Positivity: Acute, LA: 97%, CF: 91%. Chronic, LA: 96%, CF: 91%. PDH, LA: 64%, CF: 82% |
| Gutierrez et al., 2008 | Antigen detection (MVista® EIA) | 21 | AIDS patients with PDH | Sensitivity: Panamanian patients, 95.2%; US patients, 100% |
| Cloud et al., 2007 | Antigen detection (IMMY® EIA and MVista® EIA) | 99 | Random urine samples from reference laboratory | Agreement for positive samples: 92% |
| Scheel et al., 2009 | Antigen detection (ELISA developed by CDC) | 217 | AIDS patients from Guatemala | Sensitivity: 81%; specificity: 95% |
| Theel et al., 2013 | Antigen detection (comparison between IMMY® EIA and MVista® EIA) | 1003 | Random urine samples | Overall agreement of 97.6% |
| Connolly et. al., 2007 | Antigen detection (MVista® EIA 2nd generation) | 130 | PDH patients and controls | Sensitivity: 100%; specificity: 99% |
| Zimmerman et al., 1989 | Antigen detection (comparison between AP-ELISA, HRP-ELISA and RIA) | 19 | PDH | AP- and HRP-ELISA: 89.5% positivity; RIA: 94.7% positivity |
| Wheat et al., 1989 | Antigen detection (HPA-ELISA) | 61 | PDH, AIDS patients | Positivity, urine: 96.7%; blood: 78.7% |
| Durkin et al., 1997 | Antigen detection (comparison between RIA and EIA) | 182 | PDH patients and controls | Correlation coefficient: 0.974 |
| LeMonte et al., 2007 | Antigen detection (comparison between IMMY® EIA and MVista® EIA) | 50 | PDH patients and controls | Sensitivity for IMMY®: 44%; specificity: 84% for IMMY®, 98% for MVista® |
| Gomez et al., 1997 | Antigen detection (MAb ELISA) | 35 | PDH in AIDS and non-AIDS patients, acute and chronic histoplasmosis | Overall sensitivity 71.4%; PDH, 62.5–72.7% |
| Theel et al., 2015 | Antigen detection (IMMY® EIA with protocol modification) | 150 | Suspected PDH patients | 90% of agreement with MVista® EIA |
| Caceres et al., 2014 | Antigen detection (ELISA developed by CDC) | 106 | AIDS patients with suspected histoplasmosis | Sensitivity: 86%; specificity: 94% |
| Babady et al., 2011 | DNA detection (PCR) | 797 | Patients with suspected fungal infection | Sensitivity: 73%; specificity: 100% |
| Tang et al., 2006 | DNA detection (PCR) | 76 | Urine samples from patients with histoplasmosis and controls | Sensitivity: 7.8% |
| Maubon et al., 2007 | DNA detection (PCR) | 40 | Suspected PDH patients | Sensitivity: 100% in culture-positive |
| Scheel et al., 2014 | DNA detection (LAMP) | 16 | AIDS patients with PDH and controls | Sensitivity: 67% in antigen-positive |
AP, alkaline phosphatase; CDC, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta; CF, complement fixation test; EIA, enzyme immunoassay; ELISA, enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay; HRP, Horseradish Peroxidase; ID, immunodiffusion test; LA, latex agglutination test; LAMP, loop-mediated isothermal amplification; MAb, monoclonal antibody; PCR, polymerase chain reaction test; PDH, progressive disseminated histoplasmosis; RIA, radioimmunoassay; US, United States of America.