SETTING: A non-governmental organisation (NGO) supported tuberculosis control programme in Bangladesh with good smear microscopy. OBJECTIVE: To verify whether bleach sedimentation method increases the sensitivity of sputum smear microscopy for acid-fast bacilli (AFB), and if so, how. DESIGN: Duplicate smears from successive routine specimens, peripheral centres examining direct smears, and blind examination of bleach sediment smears at central laboratories. RESULTS: When all 3,287 sputum samples were examined in duplicate and the International Union Against Tuberculosis and Lung Disease cut-off for positivity was applied, more positives were not found by bleach sedimentation. Using the much lower American Thoracic Society (ATS) threshold, the percentage positives rose slightly from 15.5% for direct smear to 16.6% after bleach. The gain was more evident when suspect examinations only were taken into consideration, as bleach missed many positives identified by direct follow-up smear. When patients rather than individual smears were counted, more suspects were detected by bleach (10% gain on average), but with considerable variation between the centres (range 6-16%). To arrive at this gain, the ATS cut-off was used, with corrections for false results. Under routine conditions, however, this threshold is too low in view of possible transfer of AFB. CONCLUSIONS: Bleach sedimentation can increase the diagnostic yield, but only to a minor extent if all other factors have been optimised already; it is not a panacea. Precautions against false negatives as well as false positives should be taken, and the additional workload is not negligible.
SETTING: A non-governmental organisation (NGO) supported tuberculosis control programme in Bangladesh with good smear microscopy. OBJECTIVE: To verify whether bleach sedimentation method increases the sensitivity of sputum smear microscopy for acid-fast bacilli (AFB), and if so, how. DESIGN: Duplicate smears from successive routine specimens, peripheral centres examining direct smears, and blind examination of bleach sediment smears at central laboratories. RESULTS: When all 3,287 sputum samples were examined in duplicate and the International Union Against Tuberculosis and Lung Disease cut-off for positivity was applied, more positives were not found by bleach sedimentation. Using the much lower American Thoracic Society (ATS) threshold, the percentage positives rose slightly from 15.5% for direct smear to 16.6% after bleach. The gain was more evident when suspect examinations only were taken into consideration, as bleach missed many positives identified by direct follow-up smear. When patients rather than individual smears were counted, more suspects were detected by bleach (10% gain on average), but with considerable variation between the centres (range 6-16%). To arrive at this gain, the ATS cut-off was used, with corrections for false results. Under routine conditions, however, this threshold is too low in view of possible transfer of AFB. CONCLUSIONS: Bleach sedimentation can increase the diagnostic yield, but only to a minor extent if all other factors have been optimised already; it is not a panacea. Precautions against false negatives as well as false positives should be taken, and the additional workload is not negligible.
Authors: S I Eyangoh; G Torrea; M C Tejiokem; Y Kamdem; F F Piam; J Noeske; A Van Deun Journal: Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis Date: 2008-05-08 Impact factor: 3.267
Authors: N Selvakumar; Fathima Rahman; Renu Garg; S Rajasekaran; Nalini Sunder Mohan; K Thyagarajan; V Sundaram; T Santha; Thomas R Frieden; P R Narayanan Journal: J Clin Microbiol Date: 2002-08 Impact factor: 5.948
Authors: Rusheng Chew; Carmen Calderón; Samuel G Schumacher; Jonathan M Sherman; Luz Caviedes; Patricia Fuentes; Jorge Coronel; Teresa Valencia; Beatriz Hererra; Mirko Zimic; Lucy Huaroto; Ivan Sabogal; A Rod Escombe; Robert H Gilman; Carlton A Evans Journal: BMC Infect Dis Date: 2011-10-11 Impact factor: 3.090
Authors: Adithya Cattamanchi; David W Dowdy; J Lucian Davis; William Worodria; Samuel Yoo; Moses Joloba; John Matovu; Philip C Hopewell; Laurence Huang Journal: BMC Infect Dis Date: 2009-05-06 Impact factor: 3.090
Authors: Mecky Matee; Lillian Mtei; Tarja Lounasvaara; Wendy Wieland-Alter; Richard Waddell; Johnson Lyimo; Muhammad Bakari; Kisali Pallangyo; C Fordham von Reyn Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2008-02-21 Impact factor: 3.295