Diagnostic value of rapid test for malaria among febrile neonates in a tertiary hospital in North-East Nigeria: a prospective cross-sectional study

Abstract

ObjectiveThe WHO recommends testing using microscopy or rapid diagnostic test (RDT) before treatment for malaria. However, the use of RDT to diagnose neonatal malaria has not been widely validated with most studies limited to the first week of life. Thus, we conducted this study to determine the utility of RDT in the diagnosis of congenital and acquired malaria in febrile neonates in Nigeria.DesignThis prospective cross-sectional descriptive study consecutively recruited 131 febrile neonates at the Special Care Baby Unit (SCBU) of the Federal Teaching Hospital Gombe, Nigeria. All study participants concurrently had RDT (HRP2, LDH) and malaria microscopy. The performance of both methods was then compared.ResultSeventy-eight of 131 neonates tested for malaria by blood smear microscopy demonstrated malaria parasites; a prevalence of 59.5%. Parasite count ranged from 16 to 520 /μL and the median parasite count was 81.0 /μL with IQR (40.0–134.5). The majority of patients (93.5%) had low-density parasitaemia (≤2+). All species identified werePlasmodium falciparum. None of the 131 neonates tested positive on RDT. The sensitivity and positive predictive value of RDT for neonatal malaria was zero. Congenital malaria was the most common form of neonatal malaria, accounting for 75.6%, while acquired and transfusion-related malaria were estimated at 12.8% and 11.6%, respectively.ConclusionThe RDT used in this study was not sensitive in the diagnosis of congenital or acquired neonatal malaria; therefore, microscopy remains the preferred method of diagnosis of neonatal malaria.

Plasmodium Falciparum neonatal malaria with atypical presentation: A case series from southwestern Ethiopia

“…The World Health Organization recommends the use of Malaria rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) only in the absence of microscopy and for patients who have received incomplete antimalarial treatment and for whom blood lms can be negative [22]. In previous studies, both P. falciparum histidine-rich protein 2 (pfHRP2) and lactate dehydrogenase (LDH)-based RDTs showed poor sensitivity in the diagnosis of congenital or acquired neonatal Plasmodium falciparum malaria and cross-reactivity with transplacentally passed parasite antigens [23][24]. The highly sensitive and speci c PCR testing remains unavailable in resource-limited setups.…”

Plasmodium falciparum neonatal malaria with atypical presentation: a case series from southwestern Ethiopia

“…The World Health Organization recommends the use of malaria rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) only in the absence of microscopy and for patients who have received incomplete anti-malarial treatment and for whom blood films can be negative [ 26 ]. In previous studies, from Nigeria and Burkina Faso, both P. falciparum histidine-rich protein 2 (pfHRP2) and lactate dehydrogenase (LDH)-based RDTs showed poor sensitivity in the diagnosis of congenital or acquired neonatal P. falciparum malaria and cross-reactivity with transplacentally passed parasite antigens [ 27 , 28 ]. The highly sensitive and specific PCR testing remains unavailable in resource-limited setups.…”