A Retrospective Analysis on the Use of Algorithm for the Diagnosis of Mycobacterium Tuberculosis

Year 2016, Volume: 3 Issue: 7, 275 - 9, 28.06.2016

Huseyin Guducuoglu , Abdullah Bektas Siddik Keskin , Cennet Ragbetli

https://doi.org/10.17546/msd.27415

Abstract

Objective: The aim of this study was to investigate whether an algorithm has been used for the diagnosis of Mycobacterium tuberculosis samples over the last three years.

Material and Methods: A total of 1,036 samples collected between June 2010 and March 2013 were submitted to the laboratory for the diagnosis of Mycobacterium tuberculosis. The samples were studied using the Ehrlich-Ziehl-Neelsen (EZN) staining. Various culture methods such as Löwenstein-Jensen (LJ) medium-BacT/ALERT® 3D and the BD BACTEC™ MGIT™ 320 Mycobacteria Culture System were applied for 508 samples. Real-time Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) method was performed in 138 samples. In general, 2 or 3 samples were obtained from each patient for the diagnosis of acid-fast bacilli (AFB), whereas only one sample was obtained for culture.

Result: Of the EZN-positive samples, 30% were PCR-positive and 65% were culture-positive; of the culture-positive samples, 13% were PCR-positive and 54% were EZN-positive; of the PCR-positive samples, 21% were culture-positive and 43% were EZN-positive.

Conclusion: AFB and culture are likely to be inadequate for the determination of Mycobacterium tuberculosis. Therefore, PCR seems to be an essential need. However, the clinical table of the patient should also be considered to determine the need for PCR. Thus, an appropriate algorithm should be suggested for the diagnosis of Mycobacterium tuberculosis.

Keywords

Mycobacterium tuberculosis, algorithm, EZN; culture, PCR

A Retrospective Analysis on the Use of Algorithm for the Diagnosis of Mycobacterium Tuberculosis

Abstract

References

• Winn WC, Allen SD, Janda WM, Koneman EW, Procop GW, Schreckenberger, Woods, GL (). In Koneman, editor. Color atlas and text book of diagnostic microbiology. 6. ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams and Wilkins Press 2006, 1071–7.
• Uddin MK, Chowdhury MR, Ahmed S. Comparison of direct versus concentrated smear microscopy in detection of pulmonary tuberculosis. B.M.C. Res. Notes 2013;6:291.
• Hooja S, Pal N, Malhotra B, Goyal S, Kumar V, Vyas L. Comparison of Ziehl Neelsen & Auramine O staining methods on direct and concentrated smears in clinical specimens. Indian J Tuberc 2011;58:72-76.
• Runa F, Yasmin M, Hoq MM, Begum J, Rahman AS, Ahsan CR. Molecular versus conventional methods: clinical evaluation of different methods for the diagnosis of tuberculosis in Bangladesh. J Microbiol Immunol Infect 2011;44:101-105.
• Park SH, Kim CK, Jeong HR, Son H, Kim SH, Park MS. Evaluation and comparison of molecular and conventional diagnostic tests for detecting tuberculosis in Korea, 2013. Osong Public Health Res Perspect 2014;5:3-7.
• Lima SS, Clemente WT, Palaci M, Rosa RV, Antunes CM, Serufo JC. Conventional and molecular techniques in the diagnosis of pulmonary tuberculosis: a comparative study. J Bras Pneumol 2008;34:1056-1062.
• Githui WA. Laboratory methods for diagnosis and detection of drug resistant Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex with reference to developing countries: a review. East Afr Med J 2002;79:242-248.
• Truffot-Pernot C, Veziris N. Bacteriological tests for tuberculosis. Rev Mal Respir 2011; 28:1034-1047.
• Veziris N. Bacteriological diagnosis of tuberculosis. Rev Prat 2012;62:490-492.
• Derese Y, Hailu E, Assefa T. Comparison of PCR with standard culture of fine needle aspiration samples in the diagnosis of tuberculosis lymphadenitis. J Infect Dev Ctries 2012;6:53-57.
• Karadag A, Usta E, Bilgin K, Guney AK, Eroglu C, Gunaydin M. Comparison of Culture, Real-Time DNA Amplification Assay and Ehrlich-Ziehl-Neelsen for Detection of Mycobacterium tuberculosis. Balkan Med J 2013;30:13-15.
• Palomino JC (). Nonconventional and new methods in the diagnosis of tuberculosis: feasibility and applicability in the field. Eur Respir J 2005;26:339-350.
• Baylan O. Culture based diagnostic methods for tuberculosis. Mikrobiyol Bul 2005;39(1):107-24.
• Sanchini A, Fiebig L, Drobniewski F, Haas W, Richter E, Katalinic-Jankovic V, Pimkina E, Skenders G, Cirillo DM. European Reference Laboratory Network for TB Members, Balabanova Y. Laboratory diagnosis of paediatric tuberculosis in the European Union/European Economic Area: analysis of routine laboratory data, 2007 to 2011. Euro Surveill 2014;19(11).
• Ozyurt M. Use of molecular techniques in the diagnosis of pulmonary and extrapulmonary tuberculosis. Mikrobiyol Bul 2012;46(2):319-31.