| Literature DB >> 34063111 |
Wjdan A Arishi1, Hani A Alhadrami1,2, Mohammed Zourob3.
Abstract
Sickle cell disease (SCD) is a widespread disease caused by a mutation in the beta-globin gene that leads to the production of abnormal hemoglobin called hemoglobin S. The inheritance of the mutation could be homozygous or heterozygous combined with another hemoglobin mutation. SCD can be characterized by the presence of dense, sickled cells that causes hemolysis of blood cells, anemia, painful episodes, organ damage, and in some cases death. Early detection of SCD can help to reduce the mortality and manage the disease effectively. Therefore, different techniques have been developed to detect the sickle cell disease and the carrier states with high sensitivity and specificity. These techniques can be screening tests such as complete blood count, peripheral blood smears, and sickling test; confirmatory tests such as hemoglobin separation techniques; and genetic tests, which are more expensive and need to be done in centralized labs by highly skilled personnel. However, advanced portable point of care techniques have been developed to provide a low-cost, simple, and user-friendly device for detecting SCD, for instance coupling solubility tests with portable devices, using smartphone microscopic classifications, image processing techniques, rapid immunoassays, and sensor-based platforms. This review provides an overview of the current and emerging techniques for sickle cell disease detection and highlights the different potential methods that could be applied to help the early diagnosis of SCD.Entities:
Keywords: detection; diagnosis; hemoglobinopathies; point of care; sickle cell anemia
Year: 2021 PMID: 34063111 PMCID: PMC8148117 DOI: 10.3390/mi12050519
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Micromachines (Basel) ISSN: 2072-666X Impact factor: 2.891
Technologies for sickle-cell disease (SCD) diagnosis and monitoring.
| Technique | Sensitivity | Specificity | Accuracy | Advantages | Disadvantage | Result | Ref. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Peripheral blood smear (PBF) | 35.0%. | 96.7% | 90.5% | Simple preparation, inexpensive, Turnaround time (TAT) is 44 min | Dependence on the pathologist’s skills, | Detect sickle cells | [ |
| Solubility and Sickling | Sickling: 65.0% | Sickling: 95.6% | Sickling: 92.5% | Easy, inexpensive, fast, affordable, TAT 38 min for sickling, TAT for solubility 70 min | Testing newborns shows false-negative result, | Detect the sickling event. | [ |
| Capillary electrophoresis | Not reported | Not reported | Not reported | Reliable, ability to | Expensive, requires skilled technicians | identify and quantify HbF, Hb A, Hb A2, Hb S, Hb C, Hb Barts and other | [ |
| Isoelectric focusing (IEF) | Not reported | Not reported | Not reported | Detect HbS and HbA easily in a high concentration of HbF, Hb D-Punjab easily separated from HbS, need small volume of the sample, able to use dried blood spot, TAT is 45 min. | Expensive, requires highly trained staff to interpret the results. | Hb A, Hb F, Hb C, Hb S, Hb E and Hb O Arab | [ |
| High-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) | Not reported | Not reported | Not reported | Reliable, ability to | Misdiagnoses the new variants that mimic HbS, Expensive and needs trained personnel, not practical in limited resources areas | Detect Hb F, Hb A2, Hb S, Hb C, Hb Barts, and other Hb variants. | [ |
| Amplification-refractory mutation system (ARMS) polymerase chain reaction (PCR) for prenatal analysis | 75% | Not reported | Not reported | Simple, can be used for prenatal diagnosis | Low sensitivity, | βSβS | [ |
| Allele-Specific Recombinase Polymerase Amplification | 100% | βA: 94.7% | <95% | Affordable, rapid (less than 30 min), low-cost, accurate | This test is difficult to design, missing some single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), | βA | [ |
|
| |||||||
| Image processing technique | 96.55% | Not reported | 95% | Automated method to detect sickle cells, minimize the error of dependence on the naked eye | Cannot distinguish between different types of SCD, cannot be used to determine the severity of the disease, affected by different conditions that can affect the red blood cells (RBCs) number as in blood transfusion, expensive, needs special equipment such as camera connected to microscope | Detect Sickling RBCs | [ |
| Propose deep learning models | Not reported | Not reported | 99.54% | Indicate the sickle RBCs automatically in one shot, minimize the error of dependence on the naked eye | Cannot distinguish between different types of SCD, cannot be used to determine the severity of the disease, affected by different conditions that can affect the RBCs number as in blood transfusion, needs special equipment such as camera connected to microscope., time consuming, ignore other cells which leads to false diagnosis | Detect Sickling RBCs | [ |
| Smartphone microchip with microscope and machine learning algorithms | Not reported | Not reported | Not reported | Can be used as point of care (POC) to monitor the diseases severity, reduce the cost | Test is based on the morphology of the RBCs, cannot distinguish between different types of SCD, affected by different conditions that can affects the RBCs morphology | Detect Sickling RBCs | [ |
| Electrical impedance microflow cytometry | 91% | 86% | Not reported | Used to monitor the sickling events accurately | Does not differentiate between different type of SCD, need to be validated | Electrical impedance of the sickle cells | [ |
| Imaging flow cytometry | Not reported | Not reported | Not reported | Robust test, can be automated to correlate the percentage of HbF and the percentage of sickled cells, biomarker of disease severity | Effected by agents that reduce polymerization of HbS, laborious | Used to quantify sickled cells | [ |
| Optical tweezer to capture red blood | Not reported | Not reported | Not reported | Can be a monitor test, simple | Cannot indicate the severity of the disease in heterozygous states | Measuring red blood cell elasticity | [ |
| Photoacoustic Flow cytometry | Not reported | Not reported | Not reported | Simple, low-cost, uses cellphone-like camera. | It is not clear if it can be used to monitor the disease severity, cannot distinguish between sickle cells trait and sickle cell disease | Determine the RBCs Sickling | [ |
| lateral flow Immunoassay | 90% | 100% | 98% | Simple, rapid | Relies on polyclonal antibody, more expensive, low specificity and cross reactivity, qualitative test, the intensity of band shows inconsistency, does not identify hemoglobin F, limit of detection of Hb A is 2% | Identify HbC and HbS | [ |
| lateral flow Immunoassay HemoTypeSC | 93.4% | 99.9% | 99.1% | Cost-effective, rapid, POC | Cannot detect all hemoglobin variants, does not differentiate between HbSS and sick-le-β0-thalassemia, | HbAA, HbAS, HbAC, HbSC, and HbCC | [ |
| HemeChipMicro-elecrophoresis assay | 100% | HbSS 98.7% Other type 100% | 100% | Reliable. POC, inexpensive, simple | Interpretation requires skills, the need for web-based image for automated results | SCD-SS, SCD-SC, and SCD Trait Hb E Disease | [ |
| SCD-AMPS 2-phase | 90% | 97% | 77% | Inexpensive, simple POC | Interpretation is difficult, less reliable, affected by different conditions that decrease the number of dense cells, | Identifies Hb S and Hb A | [ |
| SCD-AMPS 3-phase | 91% | 88% | 69% | Identifies Hb S, Hb A and Hb C | [ | ||
| Paper-based hemoglobin solubility test | 94.2% | 97.7% | 96.9% | Simple, rapid, inexpensive POC, does not need trained personal | Difficult to distinguish HbAS (trait) from HbSC, | Diagnosis of HbSS | [ |
| Quartz crystal microbalance (QCM) sensor | Not reported | Not reported | Not reported | Reliable, simple, POC, low-cost | Not a diagnostic test | Determine RBC’s elasticity | [ |
| Electrochemical genosensor | 1.23 × 105 | Not reported | Not reported | Simple, low cost, POC | Determination of SCA trait only | Detect βAβS | [ |
| Surface plasmon resonance-based biosensor | Not reported | Not reported | Not reported | Simple, rapid | Needs PCR product, needs to be validated | Detect βSβS | [ |
| The Pyrosequencing technique (PyS) | 98.2% | Not reported | Sickle cell anemia 98.7% | Diagnose heterozygous SCD, simple, fast, low cost, suitable for large scale | Misclassification, false negativity, depends on primer design | Detect βSβS, | [ |
Figure 1Restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) for Sickle cell anemia: (a) normal gene(βAβA); (b) sickle cell trait (βAβS); and (c) sickle cell anemia (βSβS).
Figure 2The Sickle SCAN based on lateral flow immunoassay to detect sickle-cell disease (SCD): normal hemoglobin HbAA (a); sickle cell trait HbAS (b); sickle cell anemia HbSS (c); hemoglobin C trait (d); and sickle cell-hemoglobin C disease HbSC (e). Created with BioRender.com.
Figure 3HemoTypeSC based on lateral flow immunoassay to detect SCD: normal hemoglobin HbAA (a); sickle cell trait HbAS (b); sickle cell anemia HbSS (c); hemoglobin C trait HbAC (d); and hemoglobin SC disease HbSC (e). Created with BioRender.com.
Figure 4Multi-phase systems by cell density measurements (AMPS) to detects sickled RBCs: (a) two-phase AMPS HbAA, with HbAS (1) and HbSS and HbSC (2); and (b) three-phase AMPS, with HbAA and HbAS (1), HbSS (2), and HbSC (3). Created with BioRender.com.
Figure 5Paper-based hemoglobin solubility test. Created with BioRender.com.