| Literature DB >> 26047953 |
Meredith H Lora1, Melissa J Reimer-McAtee2, Robert H Gilman3, Daniel Lozano4, Ruth Saravia5, Monica Pajuelo6, Caryn Bern7, Rosario Castro8, Magaly Espinoza9, Maya Vallejo10, Marco Solano11, Roxana Challapa12, Faustino Torrico13.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Tuberculosis (TB) is the most common opportunistic infection and the leading cause of death in HIV-positive people worldwide. Diagnosing TB is difficult, and is more challenging in resource-scarce settings where culture-based diagnostic methods rely on poorly sensitive smear microscopy by Ziehl-Neelsen stain (ZN).Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26047953 PMCID: PMC4458042 DOI: 10.1186/s12879-015-0966-0
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Infect Dis ISSN: 1471-2334 Impact factor: 3.090
Fig. 1Recruitment of patients, samples obtained, and resulting groups of patients for sample analysis. 134 patients were enrolled in the study. 7 patients were unable to produce at least one sample (either string or sputum) and were excluded. 5 patients were excluded as their cultures were contaminated. 5 samples had long delays in processing by lab (>12 days); these patients were excluded. 107 subjects submitted a sputum sample sufficient for evaluation by ZN, LJ, and MODS that that were included in the analysis. Additionally, 24 of these patients submitted both induced and spontaneous sputum sample for comparison. Of the 107 patients who submitted an adequate sputum sample, 92 also submitted a string sample. 10 additional patients submitted string sample but did not submit sputum sample. Of these102 patients that submitted a string test sample, 70 patients (68.6 %) were able to produce sputum spontaneously (“sputum productive”). 22 patients (21.5 %) were only able to produce a sputum sample after induction (“sputum-scarce”). Ten patients (9.8 %) were unable to produce any sputum (“sputum-absent”). While we note the results of these 10 string samples, these ten patients were not included in our larger analysis of TB diagnostic methods as there was no sputum for comparison
Patient Characteristics: Median ages and CD4 counts, rates of TB positivity, and associated mortality of all TB+ patients that submitted sputum for comparison, stratified by hospitalized and ambulatory groups
| n | Median Age (IQR) | Median CD4 count (IQR) | TB+ (%) | Mortality of TB+ | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| All patients | 107 | 32 (27–43) | 98 (33–249) | 48/107 (44.9 %) | 22/48 (45.8 %) |
| Hospitalized patients | 76 | 32 (27–46)* | 76.5 (29.0-162)** | 35/76 (46.1 %)*** | 18/35 (51.4 %)**** |
| Ambulatory patients | 31 | 32 (28–42)* | 192 (64–339)** | 13/31 (41.9 %)*** | 4/13 (30.7 %)**** |
107 patients were included in analysis. Median age of all patients as well as those hospitalized vs ambulatory was 32. Median CD4 count for all patients was 98. Median CD4 count of hospitalized patients was 76 and median CD4 for ambulatory patients was 192. Rates of TB positivity (TB+), defined as a patient with a sputum or gastric string sample that was culture positive by MODS or Lowenstein Jensen, was 44.9 % in all patients, 46.1 % in hospitalized patients, and 41.9 % in ambulatory patients. Of those who were TB+, the mortality rate overall was 45.8 %. The mortality rate for hospitalized TB+ patients was 51.4 % and for ambulatory TB+ patients, it was 30.7 %
n number of patients in each group. Medians are displayed in year. IQR Interquartile range
*The difference between the median age of hospitalized versus ambulatory patients was not statistically significant (p = 0.87)
**The difference between the median CD4 count of hospitalized versus ambulatory (76.5 vs 192) was statistically significant (p = 0.01)
**The difference between the rates of TB of hospitalized vs ambulatory patients (46.1 % vs 41.9 %) was not statistically significant (p = 0.70)
***The difference between the mortality of the TB+ hospitalized patients vs mortality of TB+ ambulatory patients (51.4 % vs 30.7 %) was not statistically significant (p = 0.08)
Comparison of diagnostic methods for the detection of Mtb in hospitalized versus ambulatory and in smear-positive versus smear-negative patients
| A. | All patients | Hospitalized patients | Ambulatory patients | |||
| TB+ (n = 48) | Diagnostic yield (95 % CI) | TB+ (n = 35) | Diagnostic yield (95 % CI) | TB+ (n = 13) | Diagnostic yield (95 % CI) | |
| MODS | 46 | 95.8 % (85.7-99.5) | 34 | 97.1 % (85.1-99.9) | 12 | 92.3 % (64.0-99.8) |
| LJ | 38 | 79.2 % (65.0-89.5) | 31 | 88.6 % (73.3-96.8) | 7 | 53.8 % (25.1-80.8) |
| ZN | 30 | 62.5 % (47.3-76.0) | 22 | 62.9 % (44.9-78.5) | 8 | 61.5 % (31.6-86.1) |
| B. | All patients | Smear-positive | Smear-negative | |||
| TB+ (n = 48) | Diagnostic yield (95 % CI) | TB+ (n = 30) | Diagnostic yield (95 % CI) | TB+ (n = 18) | Diagnostic yield (95 % CI) | |
| MODS | 46 | 95.8 % (85.7-99.5) | 29 | 96.6 % (82.8-99.9) | 17 | 94.4 % (72.7-99.9) |
| LJ | 38 | 79.2 % (65.0-89.5) | 27 | 90.0 % (73.4-97.9) | 11 | 61.0 % (35.7-82.7) |
TB+ was defined as any patient with sputum or gastric sample that yielded a positive culture result by LJ or MODS. As the reference standard is a composite from all tests that are being evaluated, we can only comment on diagnostic yield rather than sensitivity and specificity. Panel A: Comparison of diagnostic yield of MODS versus LJ and ZN in all patients, hospitalized patients, and ambulatory patients who were TB positive. Panel B: Subgroup comparison of the diagnostic yield of MODS versus LJ in culture positive patients, sub-grouped into all patients, smear positive patients, and smear negative patients
n number of patients in each group; CI confidence interval; TB + samples tested positive for Mtb by each respective method (MODS, LJ, or ZN)
Fig. 2Cumulative percentages of the time to culture positivity for culture-positive samples according to culture method (a), according to smear status of sputa (b and c), and according to sample type in sputum-productive and sputum-scarce patients (d and e). A. Median time to sputum culture positivity cultured by MODS vs LJ (10 days vs 34 days, p <0.0001). b. Within MODS culture of sputa, effect of smear-positive vs smear-negative on time to culture positivity (median 8 vs 13 days, p <0.001). c. Within LJ of sputa, effect of smear-positive vs smear-negative on time to culture positivity (median 30 vs 40 days, p = 0.1367) d. Within the sputum-productive cohort, time to culture positivity of MODS sputum vs MODS string test (median 9 vs 13 days, p = 0.0058). e Within the sputum-scarce cohort, time to culture positivity of MODS sputum vs MODS string test (median 11 vs 14 days, p = 0.3159). String samples were not neutralized prior to storage and this may have affected both diagnostic yield and time to positivity. Median times to processing with interquartile ranges for each group of samples are below: All MODS Sputum Samples: Median 3 days (IQR 1–5). MODS Smear-positive Sputum Samples: Median 4 days (IQR 2–5). MODS Smear-negative Sputum samples: Median 2 days (IQR 2–4.75). LJ Sputum samples: Median 5 days (IQR 2–6). All MODS String Samples: Median 3 days (IQR 1–5). MODS Sputum-Productive Sputum Samples: Median 3 days (IQR 2–5). MODS Sputum-Productive String Samples (Median 3 days (IQR 2–5). MODS Sputum-Scarce Sputum Samples: Median 4 days (IQR 2–6). MODS Sputum-Scarce String Samples: Median 4 days (IQR 2–6)
String Test sub-analysis: Patient characteristics and comparison of diagnostic methods in sputum productive, sputum scarce and sputum absent patient subgroups
| Patient Characteristics (n = 102) | Sputum-productive (n = 70) | Sputum-scarce (n = 22) | Sputum-absent (n = 10) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Median age (years) | 32 | 30.5 | 36 | |||
| CD4 count | 122 (IQR 45–271) | 55 (IQR 23–86) | 221 (IQR 133–486) | |||
| Rate of TB+ | 28/70 (40 %) | 11/22 (50 %) | 4/10 (40 %) | |||
| Mortality of TB+ | 10/28 (35.7 %) | 8/11 (72.7 %) | 0/4 (0 %) | |||
| Test | +Mtb (n = 28) | Diagnostic yield (95 % CI) | +Mtb (n = 11) | Diagnostic yield (95 % CI) | +Mtb (n = 4) | Diagnostic yield |
| String test MODS | 18 | 64.2 % (44.7-81.4) | 9 | 81.8 % (48.9-97.7) | 4 | a |
| Sputum MODS | 27 | 96.4 % (81.7-99.9) | 11 | 100 % (71.5-100) | a | a |
| Sputum LJ | 21 | 75.0 % (55.1-89.3) | 10 | 90.9 % (58.7-99.8) | a | a |
| Sputum ZN | 17 | 60.7 % (40.6-78.5) | 7 | 63.6 % (30.8-89.1) | a | a |
TB positive was defined as any patient with sputum or gastric sample with a positive culture result from sputum or string test by LJ or MODS. This composite positivity was used as the reference standard to determine diagnostic yield. The patients that submitted a string test (n = 102) were divided into three groups based on degree of sputum productivity. Sputum-productive patients (n = 70, 68.6 %) were able to produce spontaneous sputum. Sputum-scarce patients (n = 22, 21.5 %) required sputum induction to produce sample. Sputum-absent patients (n = 10, 9.8 %) were unable to produce sputum despite induction and only submitted a string sample. Of the sputum absent patients, 4 patients were positive for Mtb by string test, but there are no samples for comparison since they were unable to produce sputum. The string test samples were not neutralized prior to culture and this may have affected diagnostic yield
n number of patients in group; IQR interquartile range; CI confidence interval
a We are unable to provide these numbers as sputum absent patients did not submit sputum for comparison