Medical Technology, School of Allied Health Sciences, Walailak University, Tha Sala, Nakhon Si Thammarat, Thailand.
Department of Medical Technology, Institute of Arts and Sciences, Far Eastern University-Manila, Manila, Philippines.
Sci Rep. 2020 Dec 11;10(1):21807. doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-78691-7.
Plasmodium ovale is a benign tertian malaria parasite that morphologically resembles Plasmodium vivax. P. ovale also shares similar tertian periodicity and can cause relapse in patients without a radical cure, making it easily misidentified as P. vivax in routine diagnosis. Therefore, its prevalence might be underreported worldwide. The present study aimed to quantify the prevalence of P. ovale misidentified as P. vivax malaria using data from studies reporting confirmed P. ovale cases by molecular methods. Studies reporting the misidentification of P. ovale as P. vivax malaria were identified from three databases, MEDLINE, Web of Science, and Scopus, without language restrictions, but the publication date was restricted to 1993 and 2020. The quality of the included studies was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS). The random-effects model was used to estimate the pooled prevalence of the misidentification of P. ovale as P. vivax malaria by the microscopic method when compared to those with the reference polymerase chain reaction method. Subgroup analysis of participants was also performed to demonstrate the difference between imported and indigenous P. ovale cases. The heterogeneity of the included studies was assessed using Cochran's Q and I statistics. Publication bias across the included studies was assessed using the funnel plot and Egger's test, and if required, contour-enhanced funnel plots were used to identify the source(s) of funnel plot asymmetry. Of 641 articles retrieved from databases, 22 articles met the eligibility criteria and were included in the present study. Of the 8,297 malaria-positive cases identified by the PCR method, 453 P. ovale cases were confirmed. The pooled prevalence of misidentification of P. ovale as P. vivax malaria by the microscopic method was 11% (95% CI: 7-14%, I: 25.46%). Subgroup analysis of the participants demonstrated a higher prevalence of misidentification in indigenous cases (13%, 95% CI: 6-21%, I: 27.8%) than in imported cases (10%, 95% CI: 6-14%, I: 24.1%). The pooled prevalence of misidentification of P. vivax as P. ovale malaria by the microscopic method was 1%, without heterogeneity (95% CI: 0-3%, I: 16.8%). PCR was more sensitive in identifying P. ovale cases than the microscopic method (p < 0.00001, OR: 2.76, 95% CI: 1.83-4.15, I: 65%). Subgroup analysis of participants demonstrated the better performance of PCR in detecting P. ovale malaria in indigenous cases (p: 0.0009, OR: 6.92, 95% CI: 2.21-21.7%, I: 68%) than in imported cases (p: 0.0004, OR: 2.15, 95% CI: 1.41-3.29%, I: 63%). P. ovale infections misidentified as P. vivax malaria by the microscopic method were frequent and led to underreported P. ovale cases. The molecular identification of P. ovale malaria in endemic areas is needed because a higher rate of P. ovale misidentification was found in endemic or indigenous cases than in imported cases. In addition, updated courses, enhanced training, and refreshers for microscopic examinations, particularly for P. ovale identification, are necessary to improve the microscopic identification of Plasmodium species in rural health centres where PCR is unavailable.
卵形疟原虫是一种良性间日疟原虫,形态上类似于间日疟原虫。卵形疟原虫也具有相似的间日周期性,并且可以在未根治的患者中引起复发,这使得它在常规诊断中很容易被误认为是间日疟原虫。因此,它的流行率可能在全球范围内被低估了。本研究旨在通过使用分子方法确诊卵形疟原虫病例的研究数据来量化将卵形疟原虫误诊为间日疟原虫的流行率。从 MEDLINE、Web of Science 和 Scopus 三个数据库中确定了报道卵形疟原虫误诊为间日疟原虫疟疾的研究,但不限制语言,但出版日期限于 1993 年和 2020 年。使用诊断准确性研究的质量评估工具(QUADAS)评估纳入研究的质量。使用随机效应模型估计显微镜法与聚合酶链反应(PCR)法相比,将卵形疟原虫误诊为间日疟原虫的混合患病率。还进行了参与者的亚组分析,以证明进口和本土卵形疟原虫病例之间的差异。使用 Cochran's Q 和 I 统计量评估纳入研究的异质性。使用漏斗图和 Egger 检验评估纳入研究的发表偏倚,如果需要,还使用轮廓增强漏斗图来确定漏斗图不对称的来源。从数据库中检索到的 641 篇文章中,有 22 篇符合纳入标准并被纳入本研究。在通过 PCR 方法确定的 8297 例疟疾病例中,有 453 例卵形疟原虫病例得到确认。显微镜法将卵形疟原虫误诊为间日疟原虫的混合患病率为 11%(95%CI:7-14%,I:25.46%)。参与者的亚组分析表明,在本土病例中,将卵形疟原虫误诊为间日疟原虫的比例较高(13%,95%CI:6-21%,I:27.8%),而在进口病例中则较低(10%,95%CI:6-14%,I:24.1%)。显微镜法将间日疟原虫误诊为卵形疟原虫的混合患病率为 1%,无异质性(95%CI:0-3%,I:16.8%)。PCR 比显微镜法更敏感地识别卵形疟原虫病例(p<0.00001,OR:2.76,95%CI:1.83-4.15,I:65%)。亚组分析表明,PCR 在检测本土病例中的卵形疟原虫疟疾方面表现更好(p:0.0009,OR:6.92,95%CI:2.21-21.7%,I:68%),而在进口病例中则表现较差(p:0.0004,OR:2.15,95%CI:1.41-3.29%,I:63%)。显微镜法将卵形疟原虫误诊为间日疟原虫的疟疾病例较为常见,导致卵形疟原虫病例报告不足。在流行地区需要进行卵形疟原虫的分子鉴定,因为在流行地区或本土病例中,卵形疟原虫的误诊率高于进口病例。此外,为了提高在无法进行 PCR 的农村卫生中心对疟原虫种类的显微镜鉴定能力,需要更新课程、加强培训和更新显微镜检查知识,特别是对卵形疟原虫的识别。