Search

Polio-associated paralysis is one of the diseases under national surveillance in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC). Although it has become relatively rare due to control measures, non-polio paralysis cases are still reported and constitute a real problem, especially for etiological diagnosis, which is necessary for better management and response. From September 2022 to April 2023, we investigated acute flaccid paralysis (AFP) cases in Kinshasa following an alert from the Provincial Division of Health. All suspected cases and their close contacts were investigated and sampled. Among the 57 sampled patients, 21 (36.8%) were suspects, and 36 (63.2%) were contacts. We performed several etiological tests available in the laboratory, targeting viruses, including Poliovirus, Influenza virus, SARS-CoV-2, Enterovirus, and arboviruses. No virus material was detected, but the serological test (ELISA) detected antibodies against Chikungunya Virus, i.e., 47.4% (27/57) for IgM and 22.8% (13/57) for IgG. Among suspected cases, we detected 33.3% (7/21) with anti-Chikungunya IgM and 14.3% (3/21) of anti-Chikungunya IgG. These results highlight the importance of enhancing the epidemiological surveillance of Chikungunya.

During the 10th outbreak of Ebola virus disease in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, the Institut National de Recherche Biomédicale strategically positioned 13 decentralized field laboratories with dedicated equipment to quickly detect cases as the outbreak evolved. The laboratories were operated by national staff, who quickly handed over competencies and skills to local persons to successfully manage future outbreaks. Laboratories analyzed ≈230,000 Ebola diagnostic samples under stringent biosafety measures, documentation, and database management. Field laboratories diversified their activities (diagnosis, chemistry and hematology, survivor follow-up, and genomic sequencing) and shipped 127,993 samples from the field to a biorepository in Kinshasa under good conditions. Deploying decentralized and well-equipped laboratories run by local personnel in at-risk countries for Ebola virus disease outbreaks is an efficient response; all activities are quickly conducted in the field.

Summary: Background: Ebola virus disease (EVD) outbreaks have emerged in Central and West Africa. EVD diagnosis relies principally on RT-PCR testing with GeneXpert®, which has logistical and cost restrictions at the peripheral level of the health system. Rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) would offer a valuable alternative at the point-of-care to reduce the turn-around time, if they show good performance characteristics. We evaluated the performance of four EVD RDTs against the reference standard GeneXpert® on stored EVD positive and negative blood samples collected between 2018 and 2021 from outbreaks in eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC). Methods: We conducted a prospective and observational study in the laboratory on QuickNavi-Ebola™, OraQuick® Ebola Rapid Antigen, Coris® EBOLA Ag K-SeT, and Standard® Q Ebola Zaïre Ag RDTs using left-over archived frozen EDTA whole blood samples. We randomly selected 450 positive and 450 negative samples from the EVD biorepositories in DRC, across a range of GeneXpert® cycle threshold values (Ct-values). RDT results were read by three persons and we considered an RDT result as “positive”, when it was flagged as positive by at least two out of the three readers. We estimated the sensitivity and specificity through two independent generalized (logistic) linear mixed models (GLMM). Findings: 476 (53%) of 900 samples had a positive GeneXpert Ebola result when retested. The QuickNavi-Ebola™ showed a sensitivity of 56.8% (95% CI 53.6–60.0) and a specificity of 97.5% (95% CI 96.2–98.4), the OraQuick® Ebola Rapid Antigen test displayed 61.6% (95% CI 57.0–65.9) sensitivity and 98.1% (95% CI 96.2–99.1) specificity, the Coris® EBOLA Ag K-SeT showed 25.0% (95% CI 22.3–27.9) sensitivity and 95.9% (95% CI 94.2–97.1) specificity, and the Standard® Q Ebola Zaïre Ag displayed 21.6% (95% CI 18.1–25.7) sensitivity and 99.1% (95% CI 97.4–99.7) specificity. Interpretation: None of the RDTs evaluated approached the ''desired or acceptable levels'' for sensitivity set out in the WHO target product profile, while all of the tests met the ''desired level'' for specificity. Nevertheless, the QuickNavi-Ebola™ and OraQuick® Ebola Rapid Antigen Test demonstrated the most favorable profiles, and may be used as frontline tests for triage of suspected-cases while waiting for RT-qPCR confirmatory testing. Funding: Institute of Tropical Medicine Antwerp/EDCTP PEAU-EBOV-RDC project.