Diagnosis of Schistosoma infection in non-human animal hosts: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background Reliable and field-applicable diagnosis of schistosome infections in non-human animals is important for surveillance, control, and verification of interruption of human schistosomiasis transmission. This study aimed to summarize uses of available diagnostic techniques through a systematic...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Published in:PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases
Main Authors: Song Liang, Keerati Ponpetch, Yi-Biao Zhou, Jiagang Guo, Berhanu Erko, J Russell Stothard, M Hassan Murad, Xiao-Nong Zhou, Fadjar Satrija, Joanne P Webster, Justin V Remais, Jürg Utzinger, Amadou Garba
Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
Language:English
Published: Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2022
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0010389
https://doaj.org/article/83be60c3aeff43e7b82a140b9d56c058
Description
Summary:Background Reliable and field-applicable diagnosis of schistosome infections in non-human animals is important for surveillance, control, and verification of interruption of human schistosomiasis transmission. This study aimed to summarize uses of available diagnostic techniques through a systematic review and meta-analysis. Methodology and principal findings We systematically searched the literature and reports comparing two or more diagnostic tests in non-human animals for schistosome infection. Out of 4,909 articles and reports screened, 19 met our inclusion criteria, four of which were considered in the meta-analysis. A total of 14 techniques (parasitologic, immunologic, and molecular) and nine types of non-human animals were involved in the studies. Notably, four studies compared parasitologic tests (miracidium hatching test (MHT), Kato-Katz (KK), the Danish Bilharziasis Laboratory technique (DBL), and formalin-ethyl acetate sedimentation-digestion (FEA-SD)) with quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR), and sensitivity estimates (using qPCR as the reference) were extracted and included in the meta-analyses, showing significant heterogeneity across studies and animal hosts. The pooled estimate of sensitivity was 0.21 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.03-0.48) with FEA-SD showing highest sensitivity (0.89, 95% CI: 0.65-1.00). Conclusions/significance Our findings suggest that the parasitologic technique FEA-SD and the molecular technique qPCR are the most promising techniques for schistosome diagnosis in non-human animal hosts. Future studies are needed for validation and standardization of the techniques for real-world field applications.