Skip to main content Skip to main navigation menu Skip to site footer

Performance comparison between Conventional Polymerase Chain Reaction and AbTes Real-time polymerase chain reaction with the gold standard of microscopy imaging detection method

  • Puspa Wardhani ,
  • Aryati ,
  • Nur Chamidah ,

Abstract

Background: Microscopy imaging-based detection is the main component of the malaria diagnostic test. The healthcare technician’s skill and experience will influence the results of the malaria microscopy examination. The polymerase chain reaction (PCR) is another sensitive detection technique that can be used as a diagnostic tool. PCR methods can be based on the conventional method or Real-time PCR. Real-time PCR is said to be more sensitive than the conventional one.  This study aimed to compare the performance of Malaria microscopic imaging, Conventional PCR, and Real-time PCR (abTESTMMalaria qPCRII) for detecting Plasmodium in human blood.

Methods: This research was a cross-sectional analytical study that successfully generated 150 specimens from November 2018 to June 2019. Blood samples were examined using microscopy imaging detection, RT-PCR, and conventional PCR.  Mann-Whitney test was used to analyze the performance of each test, which was significant if p < 0.05.

Results: A total of 150 participants were recruited. Ninety-eight subjects were detected positive by microscopic method and then compared to RT-PCR and conventional PCR. Plasmodium vivax dominated the features of the subject in all three tests. The tests show several multiple infections, like double and triple infections, especially when done by RT-PCR (28.6%). Mann-Whitney analysis revealed the significant difference between microscopic detection and  Real-Time PCR AbTes in detecting P falciparum (Pf), P vivax, and P malariae (Pm) (p<0.05). PCR Conventional and Real-time AbTes also differed significantly while evaluating  Pm.

Conclusion: Real-time PCR (abTEST Malaria qPCRII) positivity was beyond microscopic imaging and conventional PCR. It also shows significant differences with another test detecting P falciparum, Plasmodium vivax, and P malariae.

References

  1. Centers for Disease Control (CDC). Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report [Internet]. 2012. Available from: http://www.cdc.gov/malaria/diagnosis_treatment
  2. Centers for Disease Control (CDC). At a glance top 10 causes of death [Internet].2021. Available from: www.cdc.gov/globalhealth/countries/indonesia
  3. Tangpukdee N, Duangdee C, Wilairatana P, Krudsood S. Malaria diagnosis: A brief review. Korean Journal of Parasitology. 2009:47: 93–102.
  4. Wogu MN, Nduka FO. Evaluating Malaria Prevalence Using Clinical Diagnosis Compared with Microscopy and Rapid Diagnostic Tests in a Tertiary Healthcare Facility in Rivers State. Nigeria. J Trop Med. 2018:22.
  5. Mekonnen SK, Aseffa A, Medhin G, Berhe N, Velavan TP. Re-evaluation of microscopy confirmed Plasmodium falciparum and Plasmodium vivax malaria by nested PCR detection in southern Ethiopia. Malar J. 2014: 6;13(1).
  6. Rodulfo H, de Donato M, Mora R, González L, Contreras CE. Comparison of the diagnosis of malaria by microscopy, immunochromatography and PCR in endemic areas of Venezuela. Braz J Med Biol Res. 2007; 40(4):535-43. doi: 10.1590/s0100-879x2007000400012.
  7. Adiatmaja CO, Butarbutar TV, Betaubun AM, Wardhani P, Aryati. Comparison of malaria microscopy and polymerase chain reaction for identification of plasmodium in Papua, Indonesia. Systematic Reviews in Pharmacy. 2020;11(6):91–5.
  8. Mekonnen SK, Aseffa A, Medhin G, Berhe N, Velavan TP. Re-evaluation of microscopy confirmed Plasmodium falciparum and Plasmodium vivax malaria by nested PCR detection in southern Ethiopia. Malar J. 2014;13(1).
  9. Nuin NA, Tan AF, Lew YL, Piera KA, William T, Rajahram GS, et al. Comparative evaluation of two commercial real-time PCR kits (QuantiFastTM and abTESTM) for the detection of Plasmodium knowlesi and other Plasmodium species in Sabah, Malaysia. Malar J. 2020;19(1).
  10. World Health Organisation. Malaria microscopy quality assurance manual – Ver. 2. WHO. 2016;140.
  11. Wardhani P, Butarbutar TV, Adiatmaja CO, Betaubun AM, Hamidah N, Aryati. Performance comparison of two malaria rapid diagnostic test with real time polymerase chain reaction and gold standard of microscopy detection method. Infect Dis Rep. 2020;12.
  12. Inayatullah A, Fatmawati A, Abdurrahman Munir M. Comparison of Real-Time PCR and Conventional PCR by Identifying Genomic DNA of Bovine and Porcine. J Kim Terapan Indonesia. 2021:23(2):63-71. doi: https://doi.org/10.14203/inajac.v23i2.491
  13. Motshoge T, Haiyambo DH, Ayanful-Torgby R, Aleksenko L, Ntebela D, Malleret B, et al. Recent molecular assessment of plasmodium vivax and plasmodium falciparum asymptomatic infections in botswana. American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene. 2021;104(6):2159–64.
  14. Wogu MN, Nduka FO. Evaluating Malaria Prevalence Using Clinical Diagnosis Compared with Microscopy and Rapid Diagnostic Tests in a Tertiary Healthcare Facility in Rivers State, Nigeria. J Trop Med. 2018;2018.

How to Cite

Wardhani, P., Aryati, & Nur Chamidah. (2022). Performance comparison between Conventional Polymerase Chain Reaction and AbTes Real-time polymerase chain reaction with the gold standard of microscopy imaging detection method. Bali Medical Journal, 12(1), 139–143. https://doi.org/10.15562/bmj.v12i1.4035

HTML
9

Total
5

Share