| Literature DB >> 28486950 |
Getu Diriba1,2, Abebaw Kebede3, Zelalem Yaregal3, Muluwork Getahun3, Mengistu Tadesse3, Abyot Meaza3, Zekarias Dagne3, Shewki Moga3, Jibril Dilebo4, Kebebe Gudena4, Mulu Hassen5, Kassu Desta5.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Bacteriological confirmed active case detection remains the corner stone for diagnosing tuberculosis. Non-radiometric liquid culture system Mycobacterium Growth Indicator Tube with automated interface had been recommended by expert groups in addition to conventional solid culture media such as Lowenstein-Jensen. However in high burden resource limited countries advanced non-radiometric based tuberculosis diagnostic methods such as MGIT 960 is limited. Therefore we have evaluated the performance of MGIT 960 system compared to LJ for recovery of Mycobacterium complex (MTBC) from clinical specimens.Entities:
Keywords: Lowenstein–Jensen; Mycobacteria Growth Indicator Tube; Tuberculosis
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28486950 PMCID: PMC5424417 DOI: 10.1186/s13104-017-2497-9
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Res Notes ISSN: 1756-0500
Patient diagnostic categories with respective to age group at EPHI/NTRL since 2015
| Age group | Category of patient | Total no. (%) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| New patient | MDR-TB follow up patient | ||
| 4–16 | 28 (3.1%) | 21 (2.3%) | 49 (5.4%) |
| 17–29 | 127 (14%) | 262 (28.9%) | 389 (42.8%) |
| 30–42 | 148 (16.3%) | 160 (17.6%) | 308 (33.9%) |
| 43–55 | 62 (6.8%) | 30 (3.3%) | 92 (10%) |
| 56–68 | 47 (5.2%) | 9 (1%) | 56 (6.2%) |
| 69–80 | 11 (1.2%) | 3 (0.3%) | 14 (1.5%) |
| Total | 423 (46.6%) | 485 (53.4%) | 908 (100%) |
Comparison of MGIT and LJ methods for MTBC recovery and contamination rate at EPHI/NTRL since 2015
| LJ result (%) | Total | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Positive | Negative | Contaminated | ||
| MIGIT result | ||||
| Positive no. (%) | 171 (18.8%) | 58 (6.4%) | 7 (0.8%) | 236 (25.9%) |
| Negative no. (%) | 7 (0.8%) | 497 (54.7%) | 30 (3.3%) | 534 (58.8%) |
| Contaminated no. (%) | 4 (0.44%) | 87 (9.6%) | 47 (5.2%) | 138 (15%) |
| Total | 182 (20%) | 642 (70.7%) | 84 (9.3%) | 908 (100%) |
Performance and contamination of BACTEC MGIT 960 and LJ methods along with smear status at EPHI/NTRL since 2015
| MGIT | LJ | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Positive | Negative | Contaminated | Total | Positive | Negative | Contaminated | Total | |
| Smear positive | 97 (87.4%) | 13 (11.7%) | 1 (0.9%) | 111 (100%) | 74 (66.7%) | 33 (29.7%) | 4 (3.6%) | 111 (100%) |
| Smear negative | 139 (17.4%) | 521 (65.4%) | 137 (17.2%) | 797 (100%) | 108 (13.6%) | 609 (76.4%) | 80 (10%) | 797 (100%) |
Patient categories and performance of BACTEC MGIT 960 and LJ methods for diagnosis of Mycobacterium tuberculosis infection at EPHI/NTRL since 2015
| MGIT | LJ | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Positive | Negative | contaminated | Total | Positive | Negative | Contaminated | Total | |
| New patient | 131 (14.4%) | 230 (25.3%) | 62 (6.7%) | 423 (46.5%) | 103 (11.3%) | 283 (31.2%) | 37 (4%) | 423 (46.9) |
| MDR-TB follow up patient | 105 (11.6%) | 304 (33.5%) | 76 (8.3%) | 485 (53.5%) | 79 (8.7%) | 359 (39.8%) | 47 (5.2%) | 485 (53.4%) |