Giardia lamblia Immunoassay: Systematic review and meta-analysis.

Autor: Aziz AFE; Institute for Research in Molecular Medicine, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Penang 11800, Malaysia., Roshidi N; Institute for Research in Molecular Medicine, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Penang 11800, Malaysia., Muhammad Hanif MDH; Institute for Research in Molecular Medicine, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Penang 11800, Malaysia., Tye GJ; Institute for Research in Molecular Medicine, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Penang 11800, Malaysia., Arifin N; Institute for Research in Molecular Medicine, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Penang 11800, Malaysia. Electronic address: syahida_arifin@usm.my.
Jazyk: angličtina
Zdroj: Clinica chimica acta; international journal of clinical chemistry [Clin Chim Acta] 2024 Jul 15; Vol. 561, pp. 119839. Date of Electronic Publication: 2024 Jul 02.
DOI: 10.1016/j.cca.2024.119839
Abstrakt: Immunoassays are important tools in diagnosing giardiasis, though there are several controversies inherent in the existing methods. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the pooled diagnostic accuracy of immunoassays in detecting the gastrointestinal disease-causing parasite Giardia lamblia. Our comprehensive search, which included PubMed, Scopus, and ScienceDirect from 2000 up until 2023, resulted in 34 studies reporting the performance of 24 different immunoassays. The overall pooled sensitivity and specificity of immunoassays and subgroup analyses were determined. Notably, ImmunoCardSTAT® and RIDASCREEN® Giardia were the most used assays (n = 6 studies each). They exhibited sensitivity and specificity of 84 % and 99 % and 93 % and 99 %, respectively. Sub-group analysis on the type of immunoassays (without the case-control studies) showed that commercial ELISA had higher sensitivity (96 %) compared to a commercial immunochromatographic (88 %), which justifies the difference of sensitivity between ImmunoCardSTAT® and RIDASCREEN® Giardia. However, the applicability between these two in clinical settings, replacing the gold standard, should be considered including the time, equipment requirement, and budget. Samples from symptomatic patients showed higher sensitivity (92 %) compared to asymptomatic patients (79 %). Overall, immunoassays can be a practical replacement for the current gold standard, but more information should be gathered regarding the cost of providing more conclusive suggestions on these findings.
(Copyright © 2024 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)
Databáze: MEDLINE
Externí odkaz: