| Literature DB >> 28095790 |
Baye Gelaw1, Yitayal Shiferaw2,3, Marta Alemayehu1, Abate Assefa Bashaw4.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Tuberculosis (TB) caused by Mycobacterium tuberculosis is one of the leading causes of death from infectious diseases worldwide. Sputum smear microscopy remains the most widely available pulmonary TB diagnostic tool particularly in resource limited settings. A highly sensitive diagnostic with minimal infrastructure, cost and training is required. Hence, we assessed the diagnostic performance of Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP) assay in detecting M.tuberculosis infection in sputum sample compared to LED fluorescent smear microscopy and culture.Entities:
Keywords: Culture; Loop-mediated isothermal amplification; Smear microscopy; Tuberculosis
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28095790 PMCID: PMC5240421 DOI: 10.1186/s12879-016-2140-8
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Infect Dis ISSN: 1471-2334 Impact factor: 3.090
The demographic and clinical characteristics of TB suspected patients
| Variable | Number | % | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sex | Male | 38 | 48.7 |
| Female | 40 | 51.3 | |
| 13–25 | 21 | 26.9 | |
| Age | 26–35 | 22 | 28.2 |
| ≥35 | 35 | 44.9 | |
| Residence | Urban | 33 | 42.3 |
| Rural | 45 | 57.7 | |
| Single | 26 | 33.3 | |
| Marital status | Married | 44 | 56.4 |
| Divorced | 8 | 10.3 | |
| Illiterate | 47 | 60.3 | |
| Educational status | Primary | 13 | 16.7 |
| Secondary and above | 18 | 20.1 | |
| Weight loss | Yes | 44 | 56.4 |
| No | 34 | 43.6 | |
| Night sweating | Yes | 74 | 94.9 |
| No | 4 | 5.1 | |
| Pulmonary infiltrate | Yes | 53 | 67.9 |
| No | 25 | 32.1 | |
| Cavity | Yes | 13 | 16.7 |
| No | 65 | 83.3 | |
Comparison of LAMP, smear and culture methods for the diagnosis of pulmonary tuberculosis
| Culture+ | Culture– | Se %(95% CI) | Sp %(95% CI) | PPV (%) | NPV (%) | κ | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LAMP+ | 21 | 1 | 75(56.6–87.3) | 98(89.5–99.6) | 95.5 | 87.5 | 0.77 |
| LAMP- | 7 | 49 | |||||
| Smear+ | 22 | 1 | 78.6(60.5–89.8) | 98(89.5–99.6) | 95.6 | 89.1 | 0.797 |
| Smear- | 6 | 49 | |||||
| Smear + | Smear - | ||||||
| LAMP+ | 19 | 3 | 82.6(62.9–93) | 94.5(85.2–98.1) | 86.4 | 92.9 | 0.83 |
| LAMP- | 4 | 52 | |||||
| Culture + Smear + | Culture- Smear - | ||||||
| LAMP+ | 19 | 3 | 86.4(66.7–95.3) | 94.6(85.4–98.2) | 86.4 | 94.6 | 0.82 |
| LAMP- | 3 | 53 | |||||
| Culture + Smear- | Culture-Smear+ | ||||||
| LAMP+ | 2 | 0 | 33.3(9.7–70) | 100(20.7–100) | 100 | 80 | NA |
| LAMP - | 4 | 1 | |||||
| LAMP+ Culture+ | LAMP- Culture- | ||||||
| Smear + | 19 | 4 | 90.4(71.1–97.4) | 93(83.3–97.2) | 82.6 | 96.4 | 0.82 |
| Smear- | 2 | 53 |
Se Sensitivity, Sp Specificity, PPV Positive predictive value. NPV Negative predictive value, κ Kappa value. CI confidence interval
Comparison of LAMP and smear in series and parallel for the diagnosis of pulmonary tuberculosis
| Culture+ | Culture– | Se % (95% CI) | Sp % (95% CI) | PPV (%) | NPV (%) | κ | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2tests in serial | Pos | 19 | 0 | 67.8(49.3–82.1) | 100(92.3–100) | 100 | 84.7 | 0.83 |
| Neg | 9 | 50 | ||||||
| 2tests in parallel | Pos | 24 | 2 | 85.7(68.5–94.3) | 96(86.5–98.9) | 92.3 | 92.3 | 0.786 |
| Neg | 4 | 48 |
Se Sensitivity, Sp Specificity, PPV Positive predictive value. NPV Negative predictive value, κ Kappa value, CI confidence interval