CHINESE JOURNAL OF PARASITOLOGY AND PARASITIC DISEASES >

2019 , Vol. 37 >Issue 2: 232 - 234

DOI: https://doi.org/10.12140/j.issn.1000-7423.2019.02.021

SHORT COMMUNICATIONS

Application of fluorescence quantitative PCR in laboratory diagnosis of malaria

  • Su-hua LI ,
  • Jing LI ,
  • Li-jun GAO ,
  • Ya-lan ZHANG ,
  • Rui-min ZHOU ,
  • Dan QIAN ,
  • Cheng-yun YANG ,
  • Ying LIU ,
  • Yu-ling ZHAO ,
  • Hong-wei ZHANG
Expand
  • 1 Henan Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Zhengzhou 450016, China
    2 Henan International Travel Healthcare Center, Zhengzhou 450046, China

Received date: 2018-07-16

  Online published: 2019-05-13

Supported by

Supported by the Project of Medical Science and Technology of Henan Province （No. 201702274, No. 162102310066）;Science and Technology of Henan Province （No. 162102310035）

Fold

Abstract

Seventy-nine malaria samples were examined by microscopy, nested PCR and fluorescence quantitative PCR, and the detection rate was analyzed among the three methods. After combining clinical symptoms of the patients and results of the three methods, 74 of the 79 samples were confirmed to be malaria infection, with a positive rate of 93.7%（74/79）. Specifically, the detection rate of microscopy, nested PCR and fluorescence quantitative PCR were 82.3%（65/79）, 82.3%65/79） and 93.7%（74/79）, respectively. The concordance rate between microscopy and nested PCR was 78.4%（58/74）, and that between microscopy and fluorescence quantitative PCR was 63.5%（47/74）, between nested PCR and fluorescence quantitative PCR was 83.8%（62/74）. In addition, the detection rate of fluorescence quantitative PCR was significantly higher than that of the nested PCR（P < 0.05）. Compared with microscopy and nested PCR, the fluorescence quantitative PCR has higher sensitivity and positive detection rate, and is less time-consuming.

Key words： Malaria; Microscopy; Nested PCR; Fluorescence quantitative PCR

Cite this article

Su-hua LI , Jing LI , Li-jun GAO , Ya-lan ZHANG , Rui-min ZHOU , Dan QIAN , Cheng-yun YANG , Ying LIU , Yu-ling ZHAO , Hong-wei ZHANG . Application of fluorescence quantitative PCR in laboratory diagnosis of malaria[J]. CHINESE JOURNAL OF PARASITOLOGY AND PARASITIC DISEASES, 2019 , 37(2) : 232 -234 . DOI: 10.12140/j.issn.1000-7423.2019.02.021

References

[1] Lee PC, Chong ET, Anderios F, et al. Molecular detection of human Plasmodium species in Sabah using PlasmoNexTM multiplex PCR and hydrolysis probes real-time PCR[J]. Malar J, 2015, 14: 28.
[2] Koukouikila-Koussounda F, Malonga V, Mayengue PI, et al. Genetic polymorphism of merozoite surface protein 2 and prevalence of K76T pfcrt mutation in Plasmodium falciparum field isolates from Congolese children with asymptomatic infections[J]. Malar J, 2012, 11: 105.
[3] 孙菲, 万向阳, 李欢, 等. 多重巢式PCR检测恶性疟和间日疟原虫[J]. 临床检验杂志, 2014, 32(8): 565-567.
[4] 李美, 夏志贵, 汤林华. 检测4种人体疟原虫多重PCR体系的建立和应用[J]. 中国寄生虫学与寄生虫病杂志, 2015, 33(2):91-95.
[5] 黄雨婷, 佘丹娅, 卢丽丹, 等. 单管单轮多重PCR检测4种疟原虫混合血样[J]. 中国寄生虫学与寄生虫病杂志, 2015, 33(3): 200-205.
[6] 李欢. SYBR Green实时PCR检测恶性疟原虫与间日疟原虫方法的建立[D]. 长沙: 中南大学, 2014.
[7] 张金飞, 周燕珍. 三种不同检测方法在疟疾诊断中的应用比较[J]. 中国地方病防治杂志, 2016, 31(2): 201-202.
[8] 雷露, 刘学升, 毛玲玲, 等. 3种实验室检测方法在疟疾诊断中的应用比较[J]. 中国媒介生物学及控制杂志, 2015, 26(2): 206-207.
[9] Barker RH Jr, Banchongaksorn T, Courval JM, et al. A simple method to detect Plasmodium falciparum directly from blood samples using the polymerase chain reaction[J]. Am J Trop Med Hyg, 1992, 46(4): 416-426.
[10] Win TT, Jalloh A, Tantular IS, et al. Molecular analysis of Plasmodium ovale variants[J]. Emerging Infect Dis, 2004, 10(7): 1235-1240.
[11] 周瑞敏, 刘颖, 钱丹, 等. 2012年河南省疟疾标本的实验室检测分析[J]. 中国病原生物学杂志, 2014, 9(2): 177-179.
[12] 鲁少平, 邓中平, 龙妍娇, 等. 运用实时荧光RT-PCR方法检测疟原虫的研究[J]. 实用预防医学, 2015, 22(10): 1171-1173.
[13] 焦炳欣, 华文浩, 陈志海, 等. 三种检测方法在疟疾诊断和疗效中的应用评估[J]. 中国医药导报, 2012, 9(270): 98-99.
Options
Outlines

/

〈 〉