A comparison of thick-film microscopy, rapid diagnostic test, and polymerase chain reaction for accurate diagnosis of Plasmodium falciparum malaria

• Published in: Malaria Journal
• Main Authors: Kenji O. Mfuh, Olivia A. Achonduh-Atijegbe, Obase N. Bekindaka, Livo F. Esemu, Calixt D. Mbakop, Krupa Gandhi, Rose G. F. Leke, Diane W. Taylor, Vivek R. Nerurkar
• Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
• Language: English
• Published: BMC 2019
• Subjects: Malaria; Diagnosis; PCR; Microscopy; Clinical diagnosis; Arctic medicine. Tropical medicine; RC955-962; Infectious and parasitic diseases; RC109-216; Arctic
• Online Access: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12936-019-2711-4; https://doaj.org/article/b3b93baff5ce432f8f04afd35356e705

Abstract Background Accurate diagnosis of malaria is important for effective disease management and control. In Cameroon, presumptive clinical diagnosis, thick-film microscopy (TFM), and rapid diagnostic tests (RDT) are commonly used to diagnose cases of Plasmodium falciparum malaria. However, these methods lack sensitivity to detect low parasitaemia. Polymerase chain reaction (PCR), on the other hand, enhances the detection of sub-microscopic parasitaemia making it a much-needed tool for epidemiological surveys, mass screening, and the assessment of interventions for malaria elimination. Therefore, this study sought to determine the frequency of cases missed by traditional methods that are detected by PCR. Methods Blood samples, collected from 551 febrile Cameroonian patients between February 2014 and February 2015, were tested for P. falciparum by microscopy, RDT and PCR. The hospital records of participants were reviewed to obtain data on the clinical diagnosis made by the health care worker. Results The prevalence of malaria by microscopy, RDT and PCR was 31%, 45%, and 54%, respectively. However, of the 92% of participants diagnosed as having clinical cases of malaria by the health care worker, 38% were malaria-negative by PCR. PCR detected 23% and 12% more malaria infections than microscopy and RDT, respectively. A total of 128 (23%) individuals had sub-microscopic infections in the study population. The sensitivity of microscopy, RDT, and clinical diagnosis was 57%, 78% and 100%; the specificity was 99%, 94%, and 17%; the positive predictive values were 99%, 94%, and 59%; the negative predictive values were 66%, 78%, and 100%, respectively. Thus, 41% of the participants clinically diagnosed as having malaria had fever caused by other pathogens. Conclusions Malaria diagnostic methods, such as TFM and RDT missed 12–23% of malaria cases detected by PCR. Therefore, traditional diagnostic approaches (TFM, RDT and clinical diagnosis) are not adequate when accurate epidemiological data are needed for monitoring ...