BACKGROUND: Diagnostic tests are generally used in situations with similar pre-test probability of disease to where they were developed. When these tests are applied in situations with very different pre-test probabilities of disease, it is informative to model the likely implications of known characteristics of test performance in the new situation. This is the case for automated Mycobacterium tuberculosis (MTB) liquid culture systems for tuberculosis case detection which were developed and are widely used in low burden settings but are only beginning to be applied on a large scale in high burden settings. METHODS: Here we model the performance of MTB liquid culture systems in high and low tuberculosis (TB) prevalence settings using detailed published data concentrating on the likely frequency of cross-contamination events. RESULTS: Our model predicts that as the TB prevalence in the suspect population increases there is an exponential increase in the risk of MTB cross-contamination events expected in otherwise negative samples, even with equivalent technical performance of the laboratories. Quality control and strict cross-contamination measures become increasingly critical as the burden of MTB infection among TB suspects increases. Even under optimal conditions the realistically achievable specificity of these systems in high burden settings will likely be significantly below that obtained in low TB burden laboratories. CONCLUSIONS: Liquid culture systems can play a valuable role in TB case detection in laboratories in high burden settings, but laboratory workers, policy makers and clinicians should be aware of the increased risks, independent of laboratory proficiency, of cross-contamination events in high burden settings.
BACKGROUND: Diagnostic tests are generally used in situations with similar pre-test probability of disease to where they were developed. When these tests are applied in situations with very different pre-test probabilities of disease, it is informative to model the likely implications of known characteristics of test performance in the new situation. This is the case for automated Mycobacterium tuberculosis (MTB) liquid culture systems for tuberculosis case detection which were developed and are widely used in low burden settings but are only beginning to be applied on a large scale in high burden settings. METHODS: Here we model the performance of MTB liquid culture systems in high and low tuberculosis (TB) prevalence settings using detailed published data concentrating on the likely frequency of cross-contamination events. RESULTS: Our model predicts that as the TB prevalence in the suspect population increases there is an exponential increase in the risk of MTB cross-contamination events expected in otherwise negative samples, even with equivalent technical performance of the laboratories. Quality control and strict cross-contamination measures become increasingly critical as the burden of MTB infection among TB suspects increases. Even under optimal conditions the realistically achievable specificity of these systems in high burden settings will likely be significantly below that obtained in low TB burden laboratories. CONCLUSIONS: Liquid culture systems can play a valuable role in TB case detection in laboratories in high burden settings, but laboratory workers, policy makers and clinicians should be aware of the increased risks, independent of laboratory proficiency, of cross-contamination events in high burden settings.
Authors: Miguel Martínez; Darío García de Viedma; María Alonso; Sandra Andrés; Emilio Bouza; Teresa Cabezas; Isabel Cabeza; Armando Reyes; Waldo Sánchez-Yebra; Manuel Rodríguez; M Isabel Sánchez; M Cruz Rogado; Rosa Fernández; Teresa Peñafiel; Juan Martínez; Pilar Barroso; M Angeles Lucerna; L Felipe Diez; Carmelo Gutiérrez Journal: J Clin Microbiol Date: 2006-08 Impact factor: 5.948
Authors: R M Anthony; F G J Cobelens; A Gebhard; P R Klatser; R Lumb; S Rüsch-Gerdes; D van Soolingen Journal: Int J Tuberc Lung Dis Date: 2009-09 Impact factor: 2.373
Authors: W Cronin; E Rodriguez; S Valway; S Bur; N Hooper; R Smithwick; W R Butler; D Dwyer Journal: Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol Date: 1998-05 Impact factor: 3.254
Authors: Annette S de Boer; Barbara Blommerde; Petra E W de Haas; Maruschka M G G Sebek; Kitty S B Lambregts-van Weezenbeek; Mirjam Dessens; Dick van Soolingen Journal: J Clin Microbiol Date: 2002-11 Impact factor: 5.948
Authors: Nora M Carroll; Madalene Richardson; Erica Engelke; Marianna de Kock; Carl Lombard; Paul D van Helden Journal: Clin Chem Lab Med Date: 2002-09 Impact factor: 3.694
Authors: Lesley E Scott; Kerrigan McCarthy; Natasha Gous; Matilda Nduna; Annelies Van Rie; Ian Sanne; Willem F Venter; Adrian Duse; Wendy Stevens Journal: PLoS Med Date: 2011-07-26 Impact factor: 11.069
Authors: Adriana da Silva Rezende Moreira; Gisele Huf; Maria Armanda Monteiro da Silva Vieira; Paulo Albuquerque da Costa; Fábio Aguiar; Anna Grazia Marsico; Leila de Souza Fonseca; Mônica Ricks; Martha Maria Oliveira; Anne Detjen; Paula Isono Fujiwara; Stephen Bertel Squire; Afranio Lineu Kritski Journal: PLoS One Date: 2015-06-05 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Ali S Omrani; Mohammed F Al-Otaibi; Souad M Al-Ateah; Fahad M Al-Onazi; Kamran Baig; Noura A El-Khizzi; Ali M Albarrak Journal: Infect Chemother Date: 2014-03-21