Accuracy of Three Serological Techniques for the Diagnosis of Imported Schistosomiasis in Real Clinical Practice: Not All in the Same Boat

Abstract

Schistosomiasis is a neglected tropical disease despite of being a major public health problem affecting nearly 240 million people in the world. Due to the migratory flow from endemic countries to Western countries, an increasing number of cases is being diagnosed in non-endemic areas, generally in migrants or people visiting these areas. Serology is the recommended method for screening and diagnosis of schistosomiasis in migrants from endemic regions. However, serological techniques have a highly variable sensitivity. The aim of this study was to evaluate retrospectively the sensitivity of three different serological tests used in real clinical practice for the screening and diagnosis of imported schistosomiasis in sub-Saharan migrant patients, using the detection of schistosome eggs in urine, faeces or tissues as the gold standard. We evaluated three different serological techniques in 405 sub-Saharan patients with confirmed schistosomiasis treated between 2004 and 2022: an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), an indirect haemagglutination assay (IHA) and an immunochromatographic test (ICT). The overall sensitivity values obtained with the different techniques were: 44.4% for IHA, 71.2% for ELISA and 94.7% for ICT, respectively. According to species, ICT showed the highest sensitivity (S. haematobium: 94%, S. mansoni: 93.3%; and S. intercalatum/guineensis: 100%). In conclusion, our study shows that Schistosoma ICT has the best performance in real clinical practice, when compared to ELISA and IHA, in both S. mansoni and S. haematobium infections.