| Literature DB >> 35035646 |
Dongping Wang1, Wenhong Lin2, Hongyan Cheng1, Xundi Bao1, Dongfang Xu1, Suo Liang1, Yue Jiang1, Chao Wang1.
Abstract
The incidence of nontuberculous mycobacteria (NTM) diseases is increasing every year. The present study was performed to investigate the clinical characteristics, CT findings, and drug susceptibility test (DST) results of patients diagnosed with M. intracellulare or M. abscessus nontuberculous mycobacterial pulmonary disease (NTMPD). This retrospective study included patients diagnosed with NTMPD due to M. intracellulare or M. abscessus for the first time at Anhui Chest Hospital between 01/2019 and 12/2021. The patients were grouped as M. intracellulare-NTMPD group or M. abscessus-NTMPD group. Clinical features, imaging data and DST data, were collected. Patients with M. intracellulare infection had a higher rate of acid-fast smears (66.1% vs. 45.2%, P=0.032) and a higher rate of cavitation based on pulmonary imaging (49.6% vs. 19.4%, P=0.002) than patients with M. abscessus infection, but both groups had negative TB-RNA and GeneXpert results, with no other characteristics significant differences. The results of DST showed that M. intracellulare had high susceptibility rate to moxifloxacin (95.9%), amikacin (90.1%), clarithromycin (91.7%), and rifabutin (90.1%). M. abscessus had the highest susceptibility rate to amikacin (71.0%) and clarithromycin (71.0%). The clinical features of M. intracellulare pneumopathy and M. abscessus pneumopathy are highly similar. It may be easily misdiagnosed, and therefore, early strain identification is necessary. M. intracellulare has a high susceptibility rate to moxifloxacin, amikacin, clarithromycin, and rifabutin, while M. abscessus has the highest susceptibility rate to amikacin and clarithromycin. This study provides an important clinical basis for improving the management of NTMPD.Entities:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35035646 PMCID: PMC8759892 DOI: 10.1155/2022/2642200
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Can J Infect Dis Med Microbiol ISSN: 1712-9532 Impact factor: 2.471
Figure 1Culture and identification process of NTM.
Figure 2NTMPD sample inclusion.
Figure 3Melting peaks for each species in the MeltPro Myco assay in line with the 2D label strategy. To visually compare the melting temperature values of different Mycobacterium species, the melting curves showing the negative derivative of fluorescence intensity with respect to temperature were first normalized between 0 and 1, and then the data between 0.4 and 1 were plotted. MeltPro Myco assay: the MeltPro Myco assay targets the intergenic transcribed spacer (ITS) region between the 16S rRNA and 23S rRNA genes of mycobacteria using a panmycobacterial primer set. The MeltPro Myco assay includes 18 species-specific probes used to identify 17 NTM species and M. tuberculosis complex (MTBC), a genus-specific probe used to identify the Mycobacterium genus, and a set of primers and probes targeting the uninterrupted 229 bp sequence in the Mycobacterium bovis genome to distinguish Mycobacterium bovis and bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG) vaccine from M. tuberculosis, and a fragment of the Arabidopsis thaliana sucrose-proton symporter 2 (SUC2) gene serves as an internal positive control (IPC) [28]. In total, 21 labels were assigned to 19 mycobacterial species, the genus Mycobacterium, and IPC (Figure 3).
Characteristics of the patients with NTMPD.
|
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|
|
|
| ||
| Age, years, mean ± SD | 65.0 ± 10.2 | 64.7 ± 11.6 | 0.893 |
| Sex (%) | 0.936 | ||
| Male | 65.3 (79/121) | 64.5 (20/31) | |
| Female | 34.7 (42/121) | 35.5 (11/31) | |
|
| |||
|
| |||
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease | 17.4 (21/121) | 9.7 (3/31) | 0.296 |
| Bronchiectasis | 37.2 (45/121) | 51.6 (16/31) | 0.397 |
| Diabetes | 9.1 (11/121) | 16.1 (5/31) | 0.322 |
|
| |||
|
| |||
| Received antituberculosis treatment before (%) | 62.8 (76/121) | 64.5 (20/31) | 0.861 |
| Mean median antituberculosis duration (months) | 4 | 5 | 0.974 |
| Glucocorticoid (%) | 16.5 (20/121) | 19.4 (6/31) | 0.709 |
|
| |||
|
| |||
| Cough | 71.1 (86/121) | 77.4 (24/31) | 0.481 |
| Expectoration | 61.2 (74/121) | 61.3 (19/31) | 0.989 |
| Fever | 10.7 (13/121) | 12.9 (4/31) | 0.752 |
| Hemoptysis | 15.7 (19/121) | 19.4 (6/31) | 0.625 |
|
| |||
|
| |||
| T-SPOT | 23.4 (11/47) | 20 (2/10) | 0.713 |
| Acid-fast smear | 66.1 (80/121) | 45.2 (14/31) | 0.032 |
| Tuberculosis DNA | 2.0 (2/102) | 6.7 (1/15) | 0.34 |
| TB-RNA | 0 (0/112) | 0 (0/24) | — |
| Xpert MTB/RIF | 0 (0/83) | 0 (0/15) | — |
| Tuberculosis antibodies | 55.3 (52/94) | 50 (11/22) | 0.652 |
| Hemoglobin, g/L, mean ± SD | 112.35 ± 27.30 | 111.00 ± 33.25 | 0.816 |
| Albumin, g/L, mean ± SD | 34.81 ± 4.51 | 34.47 ± 5.39 | 0.716 |
| Red blood cells, ×1012/L, mean ± SD | 4.02 ± 0.66 | 4.05 ± 0.72 | 0.824 |
| White blood cells, ×109/L, mean ± SD | 5.73 ± 2.09 | 5.96 ± 2.40 | 0.591 |
| ESR, mm/h, mean ± SD | 32.87 ± 26.11 | 33.64 ± 29.32 | 0.852 |
SD, standard deviation; ESR: erythrocyte sedimentation rate. P < 0.05 were deemed statistically significant.
Pulmonary imaging findings of patients with NTMPD.
| Features, |
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||
| Left lung | 3 (2.5) | 0 | >0.999 |
| Right lung | 7 (5.8) | 0 | 0.346 |
| Both lungs | 111 (91.7) | 31 (100) | 0.215 |
| Cord-like shadow | 39 (32.2) | 9 (29.0) | 0.732 |
| Plaque-like shadow | 42 (34.7) | 14 (45.2) | 0.282 |
| Nodular shadow | 45 (37.2) | 10 (32.3) | 0.61 |
| Pleural thickening or pleural effusion | 28 (23.1) | 9 (29.0) | 0.495 |
| Mediastinal lymph node enlargement or calcification | 21 (17.4) | 3 (9.7) | 0.411 |
| Emphysema, bullae | 23 (19.0) | 6 (19.4) | 0.965 |
| Lung damage | 7 (5.8) | 1 (3.2) | >0.999 |
| Bronchiectasis | 45 (37.2) | 16 (51.6) | 0.144 |
| Cavity | 60 (49.6) | 6 (19.4) | 0.002 |
The data are shown as n (%). P < 0.05 were deemed statistically significant.
Comparison of DST results and susceptibility rates to 14 drugs in NTMPD.
| Drug name, | MIC ( | Number (%) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MIC range | MIC 50 | MIC 90 |
|
|
| |
|
| ||||||
| Amikacin | <1–64 | 1 | 16 | 109 (90.1) | 5 (4.1) | 7 (5.8) |
| Azithromycin | 1–32 | 4 | 32 | 9 (7.4) | 90 (74.4) | 22 (18.2) |
| Clarithromycin | <0.5–64 | 0.5 | 64 | 111 (91.7) | 2 (1.7) | 8 (6.6) |
| Linezolid | <0.5–32 | 8 | 32 | 34 (28.1) | 68 (56.2) | 19 (15.7) |
| Moxifloxacin | 0.125–16 | 0.5 | 2 | 116 (95.9) | 3 (2.5) | 2 (1.7) |
| Rifabutin | <0.5–32 | 0.5 | 16 | 109 (90.1) | 0 | 12 (9.9) |
| Rifampicin | <1–16 | 1 | 16 | 100 (82.6) | 8 (6.6) | 13 (10.7) |
| Gatifloxacin | 0.06–8 | 1 | 4 | — | — | — |
| Doxycycline | 4–>128 | 32 | >128 | — | — | — |
| Minocycline | <4–>128 | 32 | 64 | — | — | — |
| Sulfamethoxazole | 16–>256 | 192 | >256 | — | — | — |
| Cefoxitin | 4–160 | 32 | >160 | — | — | — |
| Tobramycin | <0.5–64 | 4 | 32 | — | — | — |
| Ethambutol | <2.5–>20 | 2.5 | 20 | 61 (50.4) | 33 (27.3) | 27 (22.3) |
|
| ||||||
|
| ||||||
| Amikacin | <1–64 | 4 | 64 | 22 (71.0) | 4 (12.9) | 5 (16.1) |
| Azithromycin | <1–32 | 16 | 32 | 10 (32.3) | 6 (19.4) | 15 (48.4) |
| Clarithromycin | <0.5–64 | 0.5 | 64 | 22 (71.0) | 2 (6.5) | 7 (22.6) |
| Linezolid | 2–32 | 8 | 32 | 16 (51.6) | 9 (29.0) | 6 (19.4) |
| Moxifloxacin | 0.125–16 | 4 | 16 | 9 (29.0) | 7 (22.6) | 15 (48.4) |
| Rifabutin | <0.5–2 | 2 | 32 | — | — | — |
| Rifampicin | <1–16 | 16 | 16 | — | — | — |
| Gatifloxacin | 0.06–8 | 2 | 8 | — | — | — |
| Doxycycline | 16–>128 | >128 | >128 | 0 | 0 | 31 (100) |
| Minocycline | <4–>128 | 64 | >128 | — | — | — |
| Sulfamethoxazole | 32–>256 | >256 | >256 | 1 (3.2) | 1 (3.2) | 29 (93.5) |
| Cefoxitin | 4–160 | 48 | 96 | 21 (67.7) | 0 | 10 (32.3) |
| Tobramycin | <0.5–64 | 32 | 64 | 3 (9.7) | 5 (16.1) | 23 (74.2) |
| Ethambutol | <2.5–>20 | >20 | >20 | — | — | — |
S, susceptible; I, intermediary; R, resistant. Because there is no recognized breakpoint, the drug resistance rate cannot be calculated.