Berry A, Fabre R, Benoit-Vical F, Cassaing S, Magnaval J F
Service de Parasitologie, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Rangueil, Toulouse, France.
Med Trop (Mars). 2005;65(2):176-83.
Since the first description, in 1990, of the diagnosis of Plasmodium falciparum infection by polymerase-chain-reaction (PCR), the role of this kind of molecular method in laboratory diagnosis of imported malaria is still a topical question. Various molecular assays have been used, the first of which was hybridization using labeled probes in 1984. When compared to thick blood smear, this test displayed a sensitivity ranging from 65% to 81% and specificity was close to 100%. The next technical improvement was the introduction of the so-called polymerase chain reaction (PCR), the principle of which was described in 1985. In 1993, a PCR-based assay detecting all four Plasmodium species was published, followed by different variants of this method. By the turn of the century, novel real-time PCR slashed workaround time, which dropped from 2 1/2 hours to less than 1 hour. Moreover, automatic reading with no human action on PCR products reduced the risks of contamination. The first application of real-time PCR to the diagnosis of malaria was published in 2001. PCR-based assays were found to be more sensitive than all conventional methods. Variations in sensitivity were probably due to different medical practices as well as to the proportion of various types of subjects (travelers under chemoprophylaxis, immigrants from malaria-endemic areas) in the population undergoing malaria diagnosis. The target of the primers was also of crucial importance: for the detection of P. falciparum, the most efficient assays amplified either the gene SSUrRNA, or Pf155/RESA, or Cox 1. Specificity of PCR results is guaranteed by the nature of the target for primers or probes, as determined by the studies of the Plasmodium genome whose results are available in GenBank. PCR use often corrected the results of Plasmodium species identification by microscopy and PCR-based methods were found to be the most efficient for the detection of mixed infections. Concerning the diagnosis of imported malaria, it appears clearly that PCR should be considered as second-line method which can be especially interesting, as a negative result rules out malaria in febrile patients. However, the use of PCR assays appears to be restricted to health centers, such as University Hospitals, for whom malaria identification is an important and routine problem. In the future, the detection of mutations related to drug resistance could be used to orient anti-malarial therapy.
自1990年首次描述通过聚合酶链反应(PCR)诊断恶性疟原虫感染以来,这种分子方法在输入性疟疾实验室诊断中的作用仍然是一个热门话题。已经使用了各种分子检测方法,其中第一种是1984年使用标记探针的杂交技术。与厚血涂片相比,该检测方法的灵敏度在65%至81%之间,特异性接近100%。下一个技术改进是引入了所谓的聚合酶链反应(PCR),其原理于1985年被描述。1993年,一种基于PCR的检测所有四种疟原虫物种的方法被发表,随后是该方法的不同变体。到世纪之交,新型实时PCR大幅缩短了检测时间,从2.5小时降至不到1小时。此外,对PCR产物进行无人操作的自动读取降低了污染风险。实时PCR在疟疾诊断中的首次应用于2001年发表。基于PCR的检测方法被发现比所有传统方法更敏感。灵敏度的差异可能是由于不同的医疗实践以及接受疟疾诊断的人群中各类受试者(接受化学预防的旅行者、来自疟疾流行地区的移民)的比例不同。引物的靶标也至关重要:对于恶性疟原虫的检测,最有效的检测方法扩增的基因要么是SSUrRNA,要么是Pf155/RESA,要么是Cox 1。PCR结果的特异性由引物或探针的靶标性质保证,这是由疟原虫基因组研究确定的,其结果可在GenBank中获取。PCR的使用常常纠正了通过显微镜鉴定疟原虫物种的结果,并且基于PCR的方法被发现对于检测混合感染最为有效。关于输入性疟疾的诊断,很明显PCR应被视为二线方法,这可能特别有意义,因为阴性结果可以排除发热患者感染疟疾。然而,PCR检测方法的使用似乎仅限于大学医院等医疗中心,对于这些中心来说,疟疾鉴定是一个重要的常规问题。未来,与耐药性相关的突变检测可用于指导抗疟治疗。