People's Journal of Scientific Research
Published June 1, 2015 | Version v1
Journal article Open

Significance of Fluorescence Microscopy in the Diagnosis of Malaria

Authors/Creators

  • 1. Department of Pathology, NKP Salve Institute of Medical Sciences & Research Centre, Nagpur (MS)

Description

The present study was undertaken to find out a new easy and comparable method with the Gold standard in the diagnosis of malaria. Fluorescence microscopy with stained smear was found to be a feasible and more sensitive procedure. Blood samples were collected from 256 patients of suspected malaria & were subjected to all three diagnostic modalitiesperipheral blood smear (PS), florescent microscopy with stained smear (FM), and antigen detection test using. Plasmodium lactate dehydrogenase (pLDH) and aldolase (AG). The results of various methods were compared. It was seen that florescence microscopy (FM) ) when compared with PS (Thick and thin smears) the sensitivity & specificity was found to be 92.4% & 77.4% respectively.FM when compared with Antigen was found to be 94.9% & 92.3% respectively.FM gives sensitivity close to AG which is the most sensitive test & the specificity is better which is close to PS which is gold standard. FM is as sensitive as AG test and as specific as PS in species identification. It is a Ultra sensitive and feasible procedure too.

Files

3 Dr Shamim Akhtar.pdf

Files (29.7 kB)

Name Size
md5:86ea312104a2dff2f8f5569970cd497d
29.7 kB Preview Download

Additional details

References

  • 1. Narayanappa D, Rajani HS, JagdishKumar K, Keerthi BJ. Rapid diagnosis of malaria using plasmodium lactate de-hydrogenase (OptiMAL) test. Pediatr Infect Dis 2009;1:2–6
  • 2. Bhandari PL, Raghuveer CV, Bhandari PD. Comparative study of peripheral blood smear, quantitative buffy coat and modified centrifuged blood smear in malaria diagnosis. Indian J Pathol Microbiol 2008;51:108–2.
  • 3. World Health Organization. World Malaria Report. World Health Organization. 2008, p8
  • 4. World Health Organization. Guidelines for the treatment of malaria. World Health Organization. 2006.p8.
  • 5. Payne D. Use and limitations of light microscopy for diagnosing malaria at the primary health care level. Bull WHO 1988;66: 621-6
  • 6. Milne LM, Kyi MS, Chiodini PL, Warhurst DC. Accuracy of routine laboratory diagnosis of malaria in the United Kingdom. J Clin Pathol 1994;47:740-42.
  • 7. Moody A. Rapid diagnostic tests for malaria parasites. Clin Microbiol Rev 2002;15:66-8.
  • 8. Warhurst DC, Williams JE. ACP Broadsheet no 148. July 1996. Laboratory Diagnosis of Malaria. J Clin Pathol 1996;49:533-38.
  • 9. World Health Organization. New perspectives in malaria diagnosis. World Health Organization. 2000;p11 p.
  • 10. Mason DP, Kawamoto F, Lin K, Laoboonchai A, Wongsrichanalai C. A comparison of two rapid field immunochromatographic tests to expert microscopy in the diagnosis of malaria. Acta Trop 2002;82:51-9
  • 11. Game BE, Silva-Pires Fdo E, Lopes MN, Cardoso MA, Britto C, et al. Real-time PCR versus conventional PCR for malaria parasite detection in low-grade parasitemia. Exp Parasitol 2007;116: 427-2.
  • 12. Perandin F, Manca N, Calderaro A, Piccolo G, Galati L, et al. Development of a real-time PCR assay for detection of Plasmodium falciparum, Plasmodium vivax, and Plasmodium ovale for routine clinical diagnosis. J Clin Microbiol 2004;42:1214-9.
  • 13. Carlo DD, Lee LP. Dynamic single-cell analysis. Anal Chem 2006;78:7918-5.
  • 14. Jin A, Ozawa T, Tajiri K, Obata T, Kondo S, et al. A rapid and efficient single-cell manipulation method for screening antigen-specific antibody-secreting cells from human peripheral blood. Nat Med 2009;15:1088-2.