Abstract Background When diagnosing malaria, testing employs blood samples using either microscopy, the current gold standard or molecular diagnostic tests (more sensitive but significantly more expensive). In Plasmodium spp. screening programs in at-risk populations where there are not many resources available, dried blood on filter paper is used to ease transport, storage and preservation of the sample. Although Plasmodium detection studies using blood serum as a sample are available, it isn´t always as sensitive as using whole blood-based sampling, as the concentration of DNA in plasma is proportional to the level of parasitaemia. This study aims to confirm the differences in sensitivity using both samples, demonstrating the importance of choosing the right type of sample to use for diagnosis. Methods The study was carried out using the VIASURE Malaria Real Time PCR Detection Kit with sera and blood samples from 94 inhabitants from Nueva Esperanza community in the Peruvian Amazon collected between 2007 and 2020, establishing a comparative analysis between matrixes. Nucleic acid extraction was performed using the QIAamp DNA Mini Kit from QIAGEN and the VIASURE assay was performed using QuantStudio®6 Flex Real-Time PCR System thermocycler (Thermo Fisher Scientific) and the BioRad CFX96TM Real-Time PCR Detection System for analysing peripheral blood samples and the BioRad CFX96TM Real-Time PCR Detection System for analysing sera. Results From the total of samples, only 5 sera (5.31%) showed amplification of Plasmodium spp., whereas from blood samples, 30 resulted to be Plasmodium spp-positive. Therefore, 26.59% of detection is lost when serum is used as a sample, as opposed to blood. Conclusion After this analysis it could be concluded that malaria detection sensitivity is appreciably higher for blood samples than for sera samples. Thus, serum samples aren´t the best choice for Plasmodium spp. testing and whole blood-based matrixes are preferable for this diagnosis. These results reinforce the idea of the importance of the sample type when diagnosing different pathogens, as well as the relevance of a confirming comparative analysis when similar sample types are involved.
Read full abstract