{"title":"在结核病高负担地区,常规方法和分子方法在结核病常规管理中的评估","authors":"Rushna Wazahat, Mehvash Haider, Debasish Chattopadhya, Mridu Dudeja","doi":"10.34172/ehsj.2023.19","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background and aims: India is a high-burden tuberculosis region and a drug-resistance hotspot. Despite numerous reports of pulmonary tuberculosis (PTB) cases, there needs to be more literature available on the importance of diagnostic methods in the case of extrapulmonary tuberculosis (EPTB). A prospective study was carried out from July 2017 to June 2018 to compare the efficacy of conventional and molecular methods in detecting PTB and EPTB cases. Methods: 1000 presumptive PTB and 412 EPTB cases were subjected to staining (Ziehl-Neelson and fluorescent staining), culture, GeneXpert, and line probe assay. Results: The sensitivity, specificity, and strength of association, i.e., kappa (k) value of LED-FM, ZN, and GeneXpert, were calculated using standard formulae using solid culture as the gold standard. The sensitivity of GeneXpert in smear-positive/culture-positive PTB was comparable with the smear-negative/culture-positive PTB cases (95.7% Vs. 87.5%) with an overall sensitivity and specificity of 90.5% and 90.1% in EPTB cases, respectively. However, sensitivity was lower for pleural fluid (75%) and tissues (85.7%). In pulmonary instances, 10% (6.7% RIF + INH resistant and 3.3%INH monoresistant) drug resistance was observed, and no drug resistance was found in extra-pulmonary samples. Conclusion: Among conventional methods, Fluorescent staining is more sensitive than Ziehl-Neelson (ZN) staining, while the sensitivity of GeneXpert varies w.r.t type of sample using culture positivity as the gold standard. The present study suggests the promotion of universal DST for all individuals with TB to control drug-resistant tuberculosis.","PeriodicalId":470613,"journal":{"name":"Epidemiology and Health System Journal","volume":"193 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Assessment of Conventional and Molecular Methods in the Routine Management of Tuberculosis in a High Tuberculosis Burden Setting\",\"authors\":\"Rushna Wazahat, Mehvash Haider, Debasish Chattopadhya, Mridu Dudeja\",\"doi\":\"10.34172/ehsj.2023.19\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background and aims: India is a high-burden tuberculosis region and a drug-resistance hotspot. Despite numerous reports of pulmonary tuberculosis (PTB) cases, there needs to be more literature available on the importance of diagnostic methods in the case of extrapulmonary tuberculosis (EPTB). A prospective study was carried out from July 2017 to June 2018 to compare the efficacy of conventional and molecular methods in detecting PTB and EPTB cases. Methods: 1000 presumptive PTB and 412 EPTB cases were subjected to staining (Ziehl-Neelson and fluorescent staining), culture, GeneXpert, and line probe assay. Results: The sensitivity, specificity, and strength of association, i.e., kappa (k) value of LED-FM, ZN, and GeneXpert, were calculated using standard formulae using solid culture as the gold standard. The sensitivity of GeneXpert in smear-positive/culture-positive PTB was comparable with the smear-negative/culture-positive PTB cases (95.7% Vs. 87.5%) with an overall sensitivity and specificity of 90.5% and 90.1% in EPTB cases, respectively. However, sensitivity was lower for pleural fluid (75%) and tissues (85.7%). In pulmonary instances, 10% (6.7% RIF + INH resistant and 3.3%INH monoresistant) drug resistance was observed, and no drug resistance was found in extra-pulmonary samples. Conclusion: Among conventional methods, Fluorescent staining is more sensitive than Ziehl-Neelson (ZN) staining, while the sensitivity of GeneXpert varies w.r.t type of sample using culture positivity as the gold standard. The present study suggests the promotion of universal DST for all individuals with TB to control drug-resistant tuberculosis.\",\"PeriodicalId\":470613,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Epidemiology and Health System Journal\",\"volume\":\"193 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Epidemiology and Health System Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.34172/ehsj.2023.19\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Epidemiology and Health System Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.34172/ehsj.2023.19","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景与目的:印度是结核病高负担地区和耐药热点地区。尽管有许多关于肺结核(PTB)病例的报道,但需要更多的文献来说明肺外结核(EPTB)诊断方法的重要性。2017年7月至2018年6月开展了一项前瞻性研究,比较传统方法和分子方法检测PTB和EPTB病例的疗效。方法:对1000例推定肺结核和412例EPTB进行染色(Ziehl-Neelson染色和荧光染色)、培养、GeneXpert和线探针检测。结果:以固体培养为金标准,采用标准公式计算LED-FM、ZN和GeneXpert的敏感性、特异性和关联强度kappa (k)值。GeneXpert在涂片阳性/培养阳性PTB中的敏感性与涂片阴性/培养阳性PTB病例的敏感性相当(95.7% Vs. 87.5%), EPTB病例的总体敏感性和特异性分别为90.5%和90.1%。然而,胸膜液(75%)和组织(85.7%)的敏感性较低。肺部病例中有10% (RIF + INH耐药6.7%,INH单耐药3.3%)耐药,肺外标本中未发现耐药。结论:在常规方法中,荧光染色法的灵敏度高于Ziehl-Neelson (ZN)染色法,而GeneXpert方法的灵敏度以培养阳性为金标准,随样品类型的不同而不同。本研究建议促进对所有结核病患者普遍进行DST,以控制耐药结核病。
Assessment of Conventional and Molecular Methods in the Routine Management of Tuberculosis in a High Tuberculosis Burden Setting
Background and aims: India is a high-burden tuberculosis region and a drug-resistance hotspot. Despite numerous reports of pulmonary tuberculosis (PTB) cases, there needs to be more literature available on the importance of diagnostic methods in the case of extrapulmonary tuberculosis (EPTB). A prospective study was carried out from July 2017 to June 2018 to compare the efficacy of conventional and molecular methods in detecting PTB and EPTB cases. Methods: 1000 presumptive PTB and 412 EPTB cases were subjected to staining (Ziehl-Neelson and fluorescent staining), culture, GeneXpert, and line probe assay. Results: The sensitivity, specificity, and strength of association, i.e., kappa (k) value of LED-FM, ZN, and GeneXpert, were calculated using standard formulae using solid culture as the gold standard. The sensitivity of GeneXpert in smear-positive/culture-positive PTB was comparable with the smear-negative/culture-positive PTB cases (95.7% Vs. 87.5%) with an overall sensitivity and specificity of 90.5% and 90.1% in EPTB cases, respectively. However, sensitivity was lower for pleural fluid (75%) and tissues (85.7%). In pulmonary instances, 10% (6.7% RIF + INH resistant and 3.3%INH monoresistant) drug resistance was observed, and no drug resistance was found in extra-pulmonary samples. Conclusion: Among conventional methods, Fluorescent staining is more sensitive than Ziehl-Neelson (ZN) staining, while the sensitivity of GeneXpert varies w.r.t type of sample using culture positivity as the gold standard. The present study suggests the promotion of universal DST for all individuals with TB to control drug-resistant tuberculosis.