Evaluating the Performance of FlukeCatcher at Detecting Urogenital Schistosomiasis

Louis Fok, Berhanu Erko, David Brett-Major, Abebe Animut, M. Jana Broadhurst, Daisy Dai, John Linville, Bruno Levecke, Yohannes Negash, Abraham Degarege

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

1 Scopus citations

Abstract

Urine filtration microscopy (UFM) lacks sensitivity in detecting low-intensity Schistosoma haematobium infections. In pursuit of a superior alternative, this study evaluated the performance of FlukeCatcher microscopy (FCM) at detecting S. haematobium eggs in human urine samples. Urine samples were collected from 572 school-age children in Afar, Ethiopia in July 2023 and examined using UFM and FCM approaches. Using the combined UFM and FCM results as a reference, the sensitivity, negative predictive value, and agreement levels for the two testing methods in detecting S. haematobium eggs in urine samples were calculated. The sensitivity and negative predictive value of detecting S. haematobium eggs in urine samples for FCM was 84% and 97%, respectively, compared to 65% and 93% for UFM. The FCM test results had an agreement of 61% with the UFM results, compared to 90% with the combined results of FCM and UFM. However, the average egg count estimates were lower when using FCM (6.6 eggs per 10 mL) compared to UFM (14.7 eggs per 10 mL) (p < 0.0001). Incorporating FCM into specimen processing could improve the diagnosis of S. haematobium infection but may underperform in characterizing the intensity of infection.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Article number1037
JournalDiagnostics
Volume14
Issue number10
DOIs
StatePublished - May 2024

Keywords

  • Ethiopia
  • FlukeCatcher
  • FlukeFinder
  • Schistosoma haematobium
  • diagnosis
  • microscopy
  • urine
  • urogenital
  • urogenital schistosomiasis

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Clinical Biochemistry

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Evaluating the Performance of FlukeCatcher at Detecting Urogenital Schistosomiasis'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this