| Literature DB >> 28320336 |
Setegn Eshetie1, Mucheye Gizachew2, Mulat Dagnew2, Gemechu Kumera3, Haile Woldie4, Fekadu Ambaw5, Belay Tessema2,6, Feleke Moges2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Efforts to control the global burden of tuberculosis (TB) have been jeopardized by the rapid evolution of multi-drug resistant Mycobacterium tuberculosis (MTB), which is resistant to at least isoniazid and rifampicin. Previous studies have documented variable prevalences of multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB) and its risk factors in Ethiopia. Therefore, this meta-analysis is aimed, firstly, to determine the pooled prevalence of MDR-TB among newly diagnosed and previously treated TB cases, and secondly, to measure the association between MDR-TB and a history of previous anti-TB drugs treatment.Entities:
Keywords: Ethiopia; Meta-analysis; Multidrug resistant tuberculosis; Systematic review
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28320336 PMCID: PMC5360058 DOI: 10.1186/s12879-017-2323-y
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Infect Dis ISSN: 1471-2334 Impact factor: 3.090
Fig. 1Flow chart shows selected articles for meta-analysis
Characteristics of included studies
| References | Year of publication | Study area | Study population | Study design | Study period | Specimen | Methods employed | No of TB patients | New MDR-TB, % | Previously treated MDR-TB, % | Overall MDR-TB, % |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Meskel et al. [ | 2008 | Addis Ababa | Previously treated PTB patients | Cross-sectional study | 2001 to 2002 | Sputum | Microscopy, culture, and DST | 84 | - | 26.2 | 26.2 |
| WHO [ | 2008 | Ethiopia (national survey) | Extra and PTB patients | Longitudinal cross-sectional study | 2003 to 2006 | N/S | Culture and DST | 147,592 | 1.6 | 12 | 1.8 |
| Yimer et al. [ | 2012 | ARS major towns | New PTB patients | Cross-sectional study | 2008 | Sputum | Microscopy, culture, and DST | 93 | 1.1 | - | 1.1 |
| Tessema et al. [ | 2012 | Gondar, Metema, Bahirdar & Debre Markos | PTB patients | Cross-sectional study | 2009 | Sputum | Microscopy, culture, genotype MTBC MTBDRs, DST | 260 | 3.7 | 10.9 | 5 |
| Abebe et al. [ | 2012 | South western Ethiopia | New PTB patients | Cross-sectional study | 2010 to 2011 | Sputum | culture and DST | 136 | 1.5 | - | 1.5 |
| Hussein et al. [ | 2013 | Bahirdar Fitche Ambo | PTB patients | Cross-sectional study | 2011 | Sputum | Microscopy, culture, RD9 typing and DST | 102 | 11.8 | 11.1 | 11.8 |
| Esmael et al. [ | 2014 | Eastern ARS | PTB patients | Cross-sectional study | 2010 to 2011 | Sputum | Culture, and DST | 230 | 1.8 | 18.5 | 6.5 |
| Biadglegne et al. [ | 2014 | Bahirdar, Gondar, & Dessie | TB lymphadenitis patients | Cross-sectional study | 2012 | Fine needle aspirates | Cytology, culture and GeneType MTBC assay & | 225 | 1.4 | 0 | 1.3 |
| Seyoum et al. [ | 2014 | Eastern Ethiopia | New PTB patients | Cross-sectional study | 2011 to 2013 | Sputum | Microscopy, culture and DST | 357 | 1.1 | - | 1.1 |
| Daniel et al. [ | 2014 | Debre Birhan | PTB patients | Cross-sectional study | 2013 to 2014 | Sputum | Microscopy, culture, deletion and spoligotyping, DST | 40 | 6.3 | 12.5 | 7.5 |
| Tekle et al. [ | 2014 | Benishangul-Gumuz & Awi | PTB patients | Cross-sectional study | 2013 to 2014 | Sputum | Microscopy, culture, RD9 typing and DST | 87 | 1.3 | 8.3 | 2.3 |
| Kebede [ | 2015 | Ethiopia | PTB patients | Longitudinal cross-sectional study | 2011 | Sputum | Culture and DST | 1422 | 2.7 | 17.9 | 5.1 |
| Adane et al. [ | 2015 | East Gojjam | PTB patients | Cross-sectional study | 2011 to 2012 | Sputum | Microscopy, culture, RD9 typing and DST | 89 | 1.3 | 16.7 | 3.4 |
| Maru et al. [ | 2015 | Dessie | PTB patients | Cross-sectional study | 2012 to 2013 | Sputum | Culture, spoligotyping and DST | 118 | 0 | 13.3 | 1.7 |
| Mekonnen et al. [ | 2015 | North Gondar | PTB patients | Cross-sectional study | 2014 | Sputum | Microscopy, Gene x-pert, culture and DST | 124 | 2.3 | 13.9 | 5.6 |
| Hamussie et al. [ | 2016 | Arsi Zone | PTB patients | Cross-sectional study | 2013 to 2014 | Sputum | Culture and DST | 106 | 2.4 | 14.3 | 4.7 |
Summary estimates of included studies
| Characteristics | Studies | TB patients | Combined effect (95%Cl) |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Study population | ||||
| Studies ≥100 patients | 11 | 150,672 | 1.9% (1.9% - 2%) | <0.001 |
| Studies <100 patients | 5 | 393 | 7.9% (5.2% -10.6%) | |
| Geographic region | ||||
| Studies from various regions | 14 | 2051 | 4.6% (3.7% - 5.5%) | 0.016 |
| National level surveys | 2 | 149,014 | 1.9% (1.8% - 2%) | |
| MDR-MTB isolation | ||||
| Culture only | 8 | 150,020 | 1.9% (1.9% - 2%) | 0.010 |
| Mixeda | 8 | 1045 | 4.3% (3.1% - 5.5%) | |
| Types of patients | ||||
| New cases | 14 | 146,320 | 2% (1% - 2%) | <0.001 |
| Previously treated cases | 12 | 7584 | 15% (12% - 17%) | |
| All studies | 16 | 151,065 | 6% (4% - 8%) | |
Keys: aCulture and molecular tests, SE standard error, CI confidence interval
Fig. 2Time trends of MDR-TB prevalence: Observed and fitted estimates
Fig. 3Forest plot of the pooled prevalence of MDR-TB among new TB cases
Fig. 4Forest plot of the pooled prevalence of MDR-TB among Previously treated TB cases
Fig. 5Funnel plots, exploring publication bias for the analysis of pooled estimate
Individual study data to calculate the odds ratio of MDR-MTB infection
| S. No | Study name | Method | MDR-TB/previously treated TB cases | MDR-TB/newly diagnosed TB cases |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | WHO [ | Culture | 861/7271 | 4964/306990 |
| 2 | Tessema et al. [ | Culture & PCR based | 5/46 | 8/214 |
| 3 | Hussein et al. [ | Culture & PCR based | 1/9 | 11/93 |
| 4 | Esmael et al. [ | Culture | 12/65 | 3/165 |
| 5 | Daniel et al. [ | Culture & PCR based | 1/8 | 2/32 |
| 6 | Tekle et al. [ | Culture & PCR based | 1/12 | 1/75 |
| 7 | EPHI [ | Culture | 39/217 | 33/1205 |
| 8 | Adane et al. [ | Culture & PCR based | 2/12 | 1/77 |
| 9 | Mekonnen et al. [ | Culture & PCR based | 5/36 | 2/88 |
| 10 | Hamussie et al. [ | Culture | 3/21 | 2/85 |
Fig. 6Forest plot of the pooled odds ratio indicating the association of previous TB treatment with MDR-MTB infection
Fig. 7Funnel plot, exploring publication bias for the analysis of odds ratio