
Leishmaniasis is a vector-borne disease with up to 350 million people at risk of infection worldwide. Among its different clinical manifestations, visceral is the most severe form. Since clinical features of visceral leishmaniasis (VL) mimic several other common diseases, accurate diagnosis is crucial as the treatment is associated with significant toxicity. Invasive and risky techniques involving demonstration of the parasites in stained preparations from splenic and bone marrow aspirate is still the gold standard for VL diagnosis. Serological tests using rK39 in ELISA or rapid immunochromatographic format, Direct Agglutination Test (DAT), immunoblotting have issues related to a significant proportion of asymptomatic individuals being positive with these tests and their inability to diagnose relapses as these remain positive for several months to years after cure. PCR is the most common molecular technique successfully used for diagnosis and differentiation of species. Through this review we focus extensively on the comparative utilities of the various diagnostic tools currently available for VL, describing in depth their advantages and disadvantages, addressing the recent advances attained in the field. A simple, rapid, non invasive, accurate and cost effective marker of active VL, which can be used in field conditions, is necessary to improve diagnosis of VL.
Agglutination Tests, Animals, Humans, Leishmaniasis, Visceral, Antigens, Protozoan, Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay, Serologic Tests, Polymerase Chain Reaction, Sensitivity and Specificity
Agglutination Tests, Animals, Humans, Leishmaniasis, Visceral, Antigens, Protozoan, Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay, Serologic Tests, Polymerase Chain Reaction, Sensitivity and Specificity
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 222 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 1% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 1% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 1% |
