Vol. 34 Núm. 1 (2017)
PARASITOLOGÍA

Validez de tres métodos de inmuno-diagnóstico de neurocisticercosis: revisión sistemática de la literatura con meta-análisis 1960-2014

PDF
  • Jaiberth Antonio Cardona-Arias,
  • Yoneida Elena Carrasquilla-Agudelo,
  • Deisy Cristina Restrepo-Posada
Jaiberth Antonio Cardona-Arias
Universidad de Antioquia; Universidad Cooperativa de Colombia
Yoneida Elena Carrasquilla-Agudelo
Universidad de Antioquia
Deisy Cristina Restrepo-Posada
Universidad de Antioquia

Palabras clave

Cómo citar

1.
Cardona-Arias JA, Carrasquilla-Agudelo YE, Restrepo-Posada DC. Validez de tres métodos de inmuno-diagnóstico de neurocisticercosis: revisión sistemática de la literatura con meta-análisis 1960-2014. Rev. Chilena. Infectol. [Internet]. 31 de marzo de 2017 [citado 23 de noviembre de 2025];34(1). Disponible en: https://revinf.cl/index.php/revinf/article/view/5

Derechos de autor 2017 Revista Chilena de Infectología

Creative Commons License

Esta obra está bajo una licencia internacional Creative Commons Atribución 4.0.

Resumen

Introduction: The screening of neurocysticercosis is complex and immunological methods have varying validity.

Objective: To evaluate the validity of ELISA for antigen and antibody, and EITB for antibody in the screening of neurocysticercosis.

Methods: Meta-analysis of diagnostic tests with an ex-ante protocol implemented in fivedata-bases with 15 search strategies, ensuring reproducibility in the selection and extraction of information. Sensitivity, specificiy, likelihood ratios (LR), diagnostic odds ratio and ROC curve were estimated in MetaDiSc, and predictive values, and Youden index were estimated in Epidat.

Results: EITB presented sensitivity of 85.7% (95% CI 83.5-87.7), specificity93.9% (95% CI = 92.7-95.0), PLR 19.6 (95% CI = 8,6-44.6), NLR 0.16 (95% CI = 0.12-0.21), OR diagnostic 136.2 (95% CI = 54.7-342.6) and area under the curve 0.926. In ELISA for antibody sensitivity was 87.5% (95% CI = 86.1-88.8), specificity92.2% (95% CI = 91.4-93.0), PLR 11.3 (95% CI = 8.45-15.11), NLR 0.15 (95% CI = 0.13-0.18), diagnostic OR 87.4 (95% CI = 60.1-127.1) and area under the curve 0.950. ELISA for antigen showed low diagnostic validity. No differenceswere found in these parameters by sample, antigen or antibody type.

Conclusion: ELISA for antibodies and EITB have a similar diagnostic value, detection of serum and CSF showed a similar validity.

PDF