Center for Bio/Molecular Science & Engineering, U.S. Naval Research Laboratory, Washington, DC, USA.
Mercy Hospital Research Laboratory, Bo, Sierra Leone.
Malar J. 2021 Mar 6;20(1):133. doi: 10.1186/s12936-021-03644-y.
Rapid and sensitive diagnostics are critical tools for clinical case management and public health control efforts. Both capillary and venous blood are currently used for malaria detection and while diagnostic technologies may not be equally sensitive with both materials, the published data on this subject are scarce and not conclusive.
Paired clinical samples of venous and capillary blood from 141 febrile individuals in Bo, Sierra Leone, were obtained between January and May 2019 and tested for the presence of Plasmodium parasites using two multiplexed PCR assays: the FilmArray-based Global Fever Panel (GFP) and the TaqMan-based Malaria Multiplex Sample Ready (MMSR) assay.
No significant differences in Plasmodium parasite detection between capillary and venous blood for both assays were observed. The GFP assay was more sensitive than MMSR for all markers that could be compared (Plasmodium spp. and Plasmodium falciparum) in both venous and capillary blood.
No difference was found in malaria detection between venous and capillary blood using two different PCR-based detection assays. This data gives support for use of capillary blood, a material which can be obtained easier by less invasive methods, for PCR-based malaria diagnostics, independent of the platform.
快速而灵敏的诊断是临床病例管理和公共卫生控制工作的重要工具。目前，毛细血管血和静脉血均用于疟疾检测，尽管诊断技术在这两种材料上的灵敏度可能并不相同，但关于这个主题的已发表数据很少且没有定论。
2019 年 1 月至 5 月期间，在塞拉利昂博城采集了 141 例发热个体的配对静脉血和毛细血管血临床样本，并使用两种多重 PCR 检测法（基于 FilmArray 的全球发热panel（GFP）和基于 TaqMan 的疟疾多重样本准备（MMSR）检测法）检测疟原虫寄生虫的存在。
两种检测方法均未观察到毛细血管血和静脉血中疟原虫寄生虫检测的显著差异。对于可以比较的所有标志物（GFP assay 中所有可以比较的标志物（所有疟原虫物种和恶性疟原虫），GFP assay 比 MMSR assay 在静脉血和毛细血管血中都更敏感。
使用两种不同的基于 PCR 的检测方法，在检测静脉血和毛细血管血中的疟疾方面未发现差异。这些数据支持使用毛细血管血进行基于 PCR 的疟疾诊断，这种方法更容易通过非侵入性方法获得，而不依赖于平台。
