Belo Vinícius Silva, Gregório Eliana Aparecida, Teixeira-Neto Rafael Gonçalves, da Rocha Lima Ana Cristina Vianna Mariano, Pereira Agnes Antônia Sampaio, Marcelino Andreza Pain, Paz Gustavo Fontes, da Silva Eduardo Sérgio
Universidade Federal de São João del Rei, Campus Centro Oeste Dona Lindu, Rua Sebastião Gonçalves Coelho, 400, 35501-296, Divinópolis, MG, Brazil.
Fundação Oswaldo Cruz, Centro de pesquisas René Rachou, Av. Augusto de Lima, 1715, 30190-002, Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil.
Prev Vet Med. 2017 Oct 1;146:10-15. doi: 10.1016/j.prevetmed.2017.07.011. Epub 2017 Jul 20.
One of the key components of the Brazilian Program for the Control of Visceral Leishmaniasis (PCLV) is the euthanasia of Leishmania-infected canine reservoirs, the detection of which depends on a screening procedure involving a Dual Path Platform (DPP) immunoassay and a confirmatory enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). The aims of the present study were to evaluate the reliability of these techniques in a region of recent transmission of canine VL, to follow up the seroconversion 3-4 months after the initial diagnosis of DPP reactive but ELISA indeterminate or non-reactive dogs, and to identify the species of Leishmania in circulation in the area. Each animal was submitted to DPP under field conditions, performed by municipal health workers using peripheral blood (DPP-field), to DPP under laboratory conditions using serum (DPP-lab) and to ELISA using serum. The agreements between the tests were determined using McNemar's χ test, Cohen's kappa coefficient (k) at the 95% confidence interval and prevalence-adjusted bias-adjusted kappa (PABAK). Of the 1130 dogs examined, 74.2% were non-reactive in all three tests applied. Based on the PCLV positive-infection criterion, seroprevalence was 8.9% (101/1130) with 83.2% (84/101) of infected animals showing reactivity in all three tests while 7.8% (8/101) were reactive in DPP-field and ELISA and 8.9% (9/101) in DPP-lab and ELISA. The proportions of disagreements were substantial in all comparisons. Inter-rater reliability between DPP-field and ELISA (k=0.55; PABAK=0.78) and DPP-lab and ELISA (k=0.59; PABAK=0.81) were considered moderate, while that between DPP-field and DPP-lab (k=0.61; PABAK=0.79) was classified as marginally good. The proportion of seroconversions in DPP reactive animals that were initially ELISA indeterminate was significantly higher than in those that were DPP reactive but initially ELISA non-reactive. Restriction fragment length polymorphism analysis revealed the presence of Leishmania infantum, the etiologic agent of VL, in bone marrow samples from VL-infected animals. Our data showed that the techniques and protocols currently employed in the PCLV screening approach are not entirely reliable. Further consideration should be given to monitoring dogs with undetermined results in ELISA and a better training should be provided for health workers responsible for performing DPP tests applied under field conditions.
巴西内脏利什曼病控制计划(PCLV)的关键组成部分之一是对感染利什曼原虫的犬类宿主实施安乐死,其检测依赖于一种筛查程序,该程序包括双路径平台(DPP)免疫测定和确证性酶联免疫吸附测定(ELISA)。本研究的目的是评估这些技术在犬类内脏利什曼病近期传播地区的可靠性,对DPP反应性但ELISA结果不确定或无反应的犬只在初次诊断后3 - 4个月进行血清转化随访,并确定该地区流行的利什曼原虫种类。每只动物在现场条件下由市政卫生工作者使用外周血进行DPP检测(DPP - 现场),在实验室条件下使用血清进行DPP检测(DPP - 实验室),并使用血清进行ELISA检测。使用McNemar卡方检验、95%置信区间的Cohen卡方系数(k)以及患病率调整偏差调整卡方(PABAK)来确定检测之间的一致性。在检查的1130只犬中,74.2%在所有三项应用检测中均无反应。根据PCLV阳性感染标准,血清阳性率为8.9%(101/1130),83.2%(84/101)的感染动物在所有三项检测中均有反应,而7.8%(8/101)在DPP - 现场和ELISA中呈反应性,8.9%(9/101)在DPP - 实验室和ELISA中呈反应性。在所有比较中,不一致的比例都很大。DPP - 现场与ELISA之间(k = 0.55;PABAK = 0.78)以及DPP - 实验室与ELISA之间(k = 0.59;PABAK = 0.81)的评分者间可靠性被认为是中等,而DPP - 现场与DPP - 实验室之间(k = 0.61;PABAK = 0.79)被归类为勉强良好。最初ELISA结果不确定的DPP反应性动物的血清转化比例显著高于最初DPP反应性但ELISA无反应的动物。限制性片段长度多态性分析显示,在感染内脏利什曼病动物的骨髓样本中存在VL的病原体婴儿利什曼原虫。我们的数据表明,PCLV筛查方法中目前使用的技术和方案并不完全可靠。应进一步考虑对ELISA结果不确定的犬只进行监测,并为负责在现场条件下进行DPP检测的卫生工作者提供更好的培训。