Charity Habeenzu1, Chie Nakajima2, Eddie Solo3, Precious Bwalya4, Kiichi Kajino5, Mari Miller6, Youichi Kurosawa7, Victor Mudenda8, Lackson Kasonka9, Yasuhiko Suzuki10, Takashi Matsuba11. 1. University Teaching Hospital, Ministry of Health, Lusaka, Zambia. habeenzu@yahoo.co.uk. 2. Hokkaido University Research Center for Zoonosis Control, Sapporo, Japan. cnakajim@czc.hokudai.ac.jp. 3. University Teaching Hospital, Ministry of Health, Lusaka, Zambia. samuneti2@yahoo.com. 4. University Teaching Hospital, Ministry of Health, Lusaka, Zambia. preciouschileshe@ymail.com. 5. Hokkaido University, Sapporo, Japan. kiichi@czc.hokudai.ac.jp. 6. University Teaching Hospital, Ministry of Health, Lusaka, Zambia. mari_miller@hotmail.com. 7. Tottori University Faculty of Medicine, Tottori, Japan. kurozawa@grape.med.tottori-u.ac.jp. 8. University Teaching Hospital, Ministry of Health, Lusaka, Zambia. mudenda2003@yahoo.com. 9. University Teaching Hospital, Ministry of Health, Lusaka, Zambia. kasonkalm@gmail.com. 10. Hokkaido University Research Center for Zoonosis Control, Sapporo, Japan. suzuki@czc.hokudai.ac.jp. 11. Tottori University Faculty of Medicine, Tottori, Japan. matsubat@med.tottori-u.ac.jp.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: To evaluate the diagnostic performances of an in-house loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP) kit and the Xpert MTB/RIF test for the diagnosis of pulmonary tuberculosis in a resource-limited setting, this study was performed at the University Teaching Hospital, Ministry of Health, the Republic of Zambia. METHODOLOGY: Two hundred sputum specimens obtained from new tuberculosis (TB) suspects were used for the evaluation of the diagnostic performance of an in-house LAMP kit in comparison with the Xpert MTB/RIF kit. RESULTS: The sensitivity of in-house LAMP and Xpert MTB/RIF was 96.9% and 95.4% in smear-positive samples, 96.8% and 100% in smear-positive/culture-positive samples, and 39.1% and 73.9% in smear-negative/culture-positive samples, respectively. The specificity of in-house LAMP and MTB/RIF kits with culture was 96.5% and 94.5%, respectively. This indicated the superiority of the Xpert MTB/RIF kit; however, mechanical errors during sample processing and the insufficient quantity of samples by Xpert MTB/RIF kit occurred at 2.0% and 19.7%, respectively, comparing to the 100% accessibility of in-house LAMP. CONCLUSIONS: Considering the results obtained in this study together with the easy setup with much simpler equipment, such as an aluminum heat block or water bath, in in-house LAMP compared with real-time polymerase chain reaction equipment in Xpert MTB/RIF kit, the applicability of in-house LAMP for the screening of tuberculosis directly from sputum in resource-limited setting seemed to be high. Copyright (c) 2017 Charity Habeenzu, Chie Nakajima, Eddie Solo, Precious Bwalya, Kiichi Kajino, Mari Miller, Youichi Kurosawa, Victor Mudenda, Lackson Kasonka, Yasuhiko Suzuki, Takashi Matsuba.
INTRODUCTION: To evaluate the diagnostic performances of an in-house loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP) kit and the Xpert MTB/RIF test for the diagnosis of pulmonary tuberculosis in a resource-limited setting, this study was performed at the University Teaching Hospital, Ministry of Health, the Republic of Zambia. METHODOLOGY: Two hundred sputum specimens obtained from new tuberculosis (TB) suspects were used for the evaluation of the diagnostic performance of an in-house LAMP kit in comparison with the Xpert MTB/RIF kit. RESULTS: The sensitivity of in-house LAMP and Xpert MTB/RIF was 96.9% and 95.4% in smear-positive samples, 96.8% and 100% in smear-positive/culture-positive samples, and 39.1% and 73.9% in smear-negative/culture-positive samples, respectively. The specificity of in-house LAMP and MTB/RIF kits with culture was 96.5% and 94.5%, respectively. This indicated the superiority of the Xpert MTB/RIF kit; however, mechanical errors during sample processing and the insufficient quantity of samples by Xpert MTB/RIF kit occurred at 2.0% and 19.7%, respectively, comparing to the 100% accessibility of in-house LAMP. CONCLUSIONS: Considering the results obtained in this study together with the easy setup with much simpler equipment, such as an aluminum heat block or water bath, in in-house LAMP compared with real-time polymerase chain reaction equipment in Xpert MTB/RIF kit, the applicability of in-house LAMP for the screening of tuberculosis directly from sputum in resource-limited setting seemed to be high. Copyright (c) 2017 Charity Habeenzu, Chie Nakajima, Eddie Solo, Precious Bwalya, Kiichi Kajino, Mari Miller, Youichi Kurosawa, Victor Mudenda, Lackson Kasonka, Yasuhiko Suzuki, Takashi Matsuba.
Entities:
Keywords:
RIF; Xpert; Xpert MTB; in house LAMP; tuberculosis
Authors: David J Horne; Mikashmi Kohli; Jerry S Zifodya; Ian Schiller; Nandini Dendukuri; Deanna Tollefson; Samuel G Schumacher; Eleanor A Ochodo; Madhukar Pai; Karen R Steingart Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2019-06-07
Authors: Mikashmi Kohli; Ian Schiller; Nandini Dendukuri; Keertan Dheda; Claudia M Denkinger; Samuel G Schumacher; Karen R Steingart Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2018-08-27
Authors: Adrienne E Shapiro; Jennifer M Ross; Mandy Yao; Ian Schiller; Mikashmi Kohli; Nandini Dendukuri; Karen R Steingart; David J Horne Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2021-03-23