Coppens Jasmine, Drieghe Charlotte, Potters Idzi, Schwob Jean-Marc, Van Esbroeck Marjan
Department of Clinical Sciences, Institute of Tropical Medicine, Nationalestraat 155, 2000 Antwerp, Belgium.
Division of Tropical and Humanitarian Medicine, Geneva University Hospitals, 1205 Geneva, Switzerland.
Diagnostics (Basel). 2024 Sep 10;14(18):1998. doi: 10.3390/diagnostics14181998.
Recently a number of broad-range stool parasite PCR assays have been developed. However, there is ongoing disagreement regarding their diagnostic performance, as various studies have produced contradictory results. In this study, we compared the diagnostic accuracy of the Seegene Allplex GI-Parasite and Allplex GI-Helminth assays (SA) with the conventional methods used at the travel clinic of the Institute of Tropical Medicine (ITM) including microscopy, antigen testing, and molecular detection in order to provide insights into the strengths and limitations of this diagnostic tool which may be crucial to select the most appropriate diagnostic tools for the suspected pathogen. A total of 97 native stool samples from 95 patients with suspected gastrointestinal illness were analyzed, including 26 from a frozen collection and 71 prospectively collected samples. The diagnostic performance of SA was notably superior to the conventional workflow in detecting (sensitivity 100% vs. 47.4%) and (sensitivity 95% vs. 77.5%). SA had a comparable performance with the conventional workflow in detecting pathogenic protozoa (sensitivity 90% vs. 95%). In contrast, SA had a much lower diagnostic performance in detecting helminths (59.1%) compared to the conventional workflow (100%). We conclude that the Seegene Allplex GI-Parasite assay may be useful for protozoa screening in low-endemic industrialized countries. However, the Allplex GI-Helminth assay is not recommended due to its suboptimal performance compared to microscopy.
最近,已经开发出了一些广谱粪便寄生虫PCR检测方法。然而,关于它们的诊断性能仍存在分歧,因为各种研究得出了相互矛盾的结果。在本研究中,我们将Seegene全谱胃肠道寄生虫检测法和全谱胃肠道蠕虫检测法(SA)的诊断准确性与热带医学研究所(ITM)旅行诊所使用的传统方法进行了比较,这些传统方法包括显微镜检查、抗原检测和分子检测,以便深入了解这种诊断工具的优势和局限性,这对于为疑似病原体选择最合适的诊断工具可能至关重要。共分析了95例疑似胃肠道疾病患者的97份天然粪便样本,其中包括26份来自冷冻样本库的样本和71份前瞻性收集的样本。SA在检测 (灵敏度100%对47.4%)和 (灵敏度95%对77.5%)方面的诊断性能明显优于传统检测流程。SA在检测致病性原生动物方面与传统检测流程表现相当(灵敏度90%对95%)。相比之下,SA在检测蠕虫方面的诊断性能(59.1%)远低于传统检测流程(100%)。我们得出结论,Seegene全谱胃肠道寄生虫检测法可能有助于在低流行率的工业化国家进行原生动物筛查。然而,由于与显微镜检查相比性能欠佳,不推荐使用全谱胃肠道蠕虫检测法。