Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30180155›Full record

ArticlePLoS neglected tropical diseases2018

Evaluation of Auramine O staining and conventional PCR for leprosy diagnosis: A comparative cross-sectional study from Ethiopia.

Selfu Girma, Charlotte Avanzi, Kidist Bobosha, Kassu Desta, Munir H Idriss, Philippe Busso, Yohannes Tsegaye, Shimelis Nigusse, Tsegaye Hailu, Stewart T Cole and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative StudyEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS neglected tropical diseases, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 30% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. qPCR detection ofFrontiers in molecular biosciences · 2024
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Population Genomics ofFrontiers in microbiology · 2020
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.

Selfu GirmaArmauer Hansen Research Institute, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.ORCID 0000-0002-1866-0950
Charlotte AvanziGlobal Health Institute, École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-1062-4058
Kidist BoboshaArmauer Hansen Research Institute, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Kassu DestaAddis Ababa University, CHS, Department of Medical Laboratory Sciences, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Munir H IdrissArmauer Hansen Research Institute, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Philippe BussoGlobal Health Institute, École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Yohannes TsegayeArmauer Hansen Research Institute, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Shimelis NigusseALERT hospital, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Tsegaye HailuArmauer Hansen Research Institute, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Stewart T ColeGlobal Health Institute, École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Abraham AseffaArmauer Hansen Research Institute, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Armauer Hansen Research Institute · ETÉcole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne · CHAddis Ababa University · ETAll Africa Leprosy Tuberculosis and Rehabilitation Training Centre · ETInstitut Pasteur · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDiagnosis of leprosy mainly relies on clinical examination due to the inconsistent sensitivity and poor reproducibility of the current laboratory tests. Utilisation of alternative methods to the standard Ziehl Neelsen (ZN), Fite-Faraco (FF) and Haematoxylin and Eosin (H&E) staining procedures may eventually improve leprosy diagnosis. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL

findingsIn this comparative study, the performance of the fluorescent Auramine O (AO) staining and polymerase chain reaction (PCR) was assessed with different skin samples using a combination of ZN, FF and H&E staining as the gold standard. AO, ZN, FF, H&E and PCR tests were performed on slit skin smears (SSS) and/or punch biopsies collected from 141 clinically confirmed leprosy cases and 28 non-leprosy skin samples. DNA was extracted from punch biopsies using two different methods with or without mechanical lysis. Sensitivities were 87.6%, 59.3% and 77% for H&E, ZN and FF, respectively, whereas it reached 65.5% and 77.9% for AO in SSS and tissue sections and 91.1% for PCR in tissue samples. Morover, samples with low bacillary index, sensitivity of AO staining (61.8%) was similar to FF (60%, p>0.05) and lower than PCR (86.6%, p<0.05). Sensitivity of PCR also increased (96.8%, p<0.05) when mechanical lysis was used during DNA extraction compared to enzymatic treatment alone (84.6%). CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: Our results showed that for diagnostic purposes, analysis of skin section is more sensitive than SSS, especially for samples with low bacillary load. AO staining on SSS and tissue sections was not significantly better than other routine diagnostic tests but considerably more user friendly. The sensitivity of PCR was higher than current standard methods and increased when combined with more efficient DNA extraction using mechanical and chemical lysis. Therefore, we recommend AO staining for the diagnosis of leprosy in lower health facilities such as health centres and district hospitals and PCR diagnosis at referral level and research centres.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedBacteriological TechniquesBenzophenoneidumColoring AgentsCross-Sectional StudiesDiagnostic Tests, RoutineEthiopiaFemaleHumansLeprosyMaleMiddle AgedPolymerase Chain ReactionSensitivity and SpecificityBenzophenoneidumColoring Agents

Identifiers

PMID30180155
PMCPMC6138420
OpenAlexW2891617186

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.