ArticleClinical microbiology and infection : the official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases2018
A comparison of two molecular methods for diagnosing leptospirosis from three different sample types in patients presenting with fever in Laos.
Article in Clinical microbiology and infection : the official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
15 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Diagnosis of human leptospirosis: systematic review and meta-analysis of the diagnostic accuracy of the Leptospira microscopic agglutination test, PCR targeting Lfb1, and IgM ELISA to Leptospira fainei serovar Hurstbridge.BMC infectious diseases · 2024Pooled it
- Trends and advances inFrontiers in microbiology · 2024Pooled it
- Prevalence ofFrontiers in veterinary science · 2022Pooled it
- Diagnostic accuracy of genetic markers and nucleic acid techniques for the detection of Leptospira in clinical samples: A meta-analysis.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2020Pooled it
- Nucleic acid and antigen detection tests for leptospirosis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2019Pooled it
- Diagnosis of Human Leptospirosis in a Clinical Setting: Real-Time PCR High Resolution Melting Analysis for Detection of Leptospira at the Onset of Disease.Scientific reports · 2018Trial
- Molecular epidemiology of rodent-borneJournal of medical microbiology · 2026Article
- Urine PCR testing as an effective method for early diagnosis of leptospirosis.Microbiology spectrum · 2025Article
- Laboratory diagnostic, epidemiological, and clinical characteristics of human leptospirosis in Okinawa Prefecture, Japan, 2003-2020.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2021Article
- Genetic diversity of Leptospira isolates in Lao PDR and genome analysis of an outbreak strain.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2021Article
- Article
- Article
- Detection ofVeterinary world · 2020Article
- Usefulness of Nested Polymerase Chain Reaction with Clinical Specimens for Diagnosis of Leptospirosis: a Case Series and a Review of Literature.Journal of Korean medical science · 2020Article
- Leptospirosis: a neglected tropical zoonotic infection of public health importance-an updated review.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
19 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo compare two molecular assays (rrs quantitative PCR (qPCR) versus a combined 16SrRNA and LipL32 qPCR) on different sample types for diagnosing leptospirosis in febrile patients presenting to Mahosot Hospital, Vientiane, Laos.
methodsSerum, buffy coat and urine samples were collected on admission, and follow-up serum ∼10 days later. Leptospira spp. culture and microscopic agglutination tests (MAT) were performed as reference standards. Bayesian latent class modelling was performed to estimate sensitivity and specificity of each diagnostic test.
resultsIn all, 787 patients were included in the analysis: 4/787 (0.5%) were Leptospira culture positive, 30/787 (3.8%) were MAT positive, 76/787 (9.7%) were rrs qPCR positive and 20/787 (2.5%) were 16SrRNA/LipL32 qPCR positive for pathogenic Leptospira spp. in at least one sample. Estimated sensitivity and specificity (with 95% CI) of 16SrRNA/LipL32 qPCR on serum (53.9% (33.3%-81.8%); 99.6% (99.2%-100%)), buffy coat (58.8% (34.4%-90.9%); 99.9% (99.6%-100%)) and urine samples (45.0% (27.0%-66.7%); 99.6% (99.3%-100%)) were comparable with those of rrs qPCR, except specificity of 16SrRNA/LipL32 qPCR on urine samples was significantly higher (99.6% (99.3%-100%) vs. 92.5% (92.3%-92.8%), p <0.001). Sensitivities of MAT (16% (95% CI 6.3%-29.4%)) and culture (25% (95% CI 13.3%-44.4%)) were low. Mean positive Cq values showed that buffy coat samples were more frequently inhibitory to qPCR than either serum or urine (p <0.001).
conclusionsSerum and urine are better samples for qPCR than buffy coat, and 16SrRNA/LipL32 qPCR performs better than rrs qPCR on urine. Quantitative PCR on admission is a reliable rapid diagnostic tool, performing better than MAT or culture, with significant implications for clinical and epidemiological investigations of this global neglected disease.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.