The Wellcome Trust Research Laboratory, Division of Gastrointestinal Sciences, Christian Medical College, Vellore, India.
Department of Infectious Diseases, Christian Medical College, Vellore, India.
Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2024 Jul 23;111(4):791-795. doi: 10.4269/ajtmh.23-0492. Print 2024 Oct 2.
Amoebic liver abscess (ALA) is the most common extra-intestinal complication of Entamoeba histolytica, accounting for 50,000 deaths annually, and is endemic in South Asia. Diagnosis based on microscopic examination is insensitive, and serological assays are not discerning of current infections in endemic settings with high exposure. For a rapid and confirmatory laboratory diagnosis of ALA, the performance of a polymerase chain reaction (PCR), quantitative real time PCR (qPCR), digital droplet PCR (ddPCR), and a loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP) assay that detects E. histolytica DNA in liver abscess pus, and a lectin antigen detection ELISA were evaluated against clinical diagnosis (based on predefined criteria) as the gold standard. Owing to the lack of a laboratory gold standard, a Bayesian latent class analysis approach was also used to determine sensitivity and specificity of these assays. In the latent class analysis, qPCR and ddPCR showed the highest sensitivity (98% and 98.1%) and specificity (both 96.6%), and although clinical diagnosis had a comparable sensitivity to qPCR and ddPCR (95.2%), poorer specificity (64.3%) was seen. Kappa agreement analysis showed that qPCR and ddPCR had a perfect agreement of 1 followed by an agreement of 0.76 (95% CI: 0.64-0.88) with PCR. Considering the performance characteristics and relative ease of setting up qPCR as well as the wide availability of qPCR equipment needed, this would be the most optimal assay for rapid, confirmatory, molecular diagnosis of ALA in the tertiary care laboratory setting in India, whereas further optimization of LAMP or antibody-based detection is required for use at smaller or secondary hospitals.
阿米巴肝脓肿 (ALA) 是溶组织内阿米巴最常见的肠外并发症,每年导致 5 万人死亡,在南亚流行。基于显微镜检查的诊断不敏感,而在高暴露的流行地区,血清学检测无法区分当前感染。为了快速、明确地对 ALA 进行实验室诊断,我们评估了聚合酶链反应 (PCR)、实时定量 PCR (qPCR)、数字液滴 PCR (ddPCR) 和环介导等温扩增 (LAMP) 检测肝脓肿脓液中溶组织内阿米巴 DNA 的检测方法,以及检测溶组织内阿米巴的凝集素抗原检测 ELISA ,与临床诊断(基于预设标准)作为金标准进行对比。由于缺乏实验室金标准,我们还使用贝叶斯潜在类别分析方法来确定这些检测方法的敏感性和特异性。在潜在类别分析中,qPCR 和 ddPCR 显示出最高的敏感性(98%和 98.1%)和特异性(均为 96.6%),尽管临床诊断与 qPCR 和 ddPCR 的敏感性相当(95.2%),但其特异性(64.3%)较差。Kappa 一致性分析显示,qPCR 和 ddPCR 具有完美的一致性(1),随后是 0.76 的一致性(95%置信区间:0.64-0.88)与 PCR。考虑到性能特征和设置 qPCR 的相对容易性,以及印度三级护理实验室设置中广泛需要 qPCR 设备,这将是用于快速、明确、分子诊断 ALA 的最理想检测方法,而对于较小或二级医院,需要进一步优化 LAMP 或基于抗体的检测。