COMPARATIVE ASSESSMENT OF DIFFERENT DIAGNOSTIC TECHNIQUES IN THE IDENTIFICATION OF MYCOBACTERIUM TUBERCULOSIS IN SUSPECTED CASES OF TUBERCULOSIS

A. Ojo, S. Adebajo, O. Ojo, A. Ajibola, D. Ojo, O. Ejilude, W. Ike
{"title":"COMPARATIVE ASSESSMENT OF DIFFERENT DIAGNOSTIC TECHNIQUES IN THE IDENTIFICATION OF MYCOBACTERIUM TUBERCULOSIS IN SUSPECTED CASES OF TUBERCULOSIS","authors":"A. Ojo, S. Adebajo, O. Ojo, A. Ajibola, D. Ojo, O. Ejilude, W. Ike","doi":"10.51406/jnset.v19i1.2112","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Statement of the Problem: Tuberculosis remains a serious public-health threat in developing countries though it has been eradicated in some advanced countries. This disease constitutes a significant threat to global health, being the second highest cause of morbidity and mortality resulting from infectious agents. Prompt diagnosis of active TB facilitates timely therapeutic intervention and minimizes community transmission. Aim: This study aimed at determining a ‘Point of Care’ diagnostic tool for pulmonary tuberculosis (PTB) by comparing the efficiency of four different PTB diagnostic tools for different age groups. Methodology: Zeihl Nelson (ZN) staining, culture, Gene xpert (GX) and Lipoarabinomanan (LAM) assay were employed in this study The culture method was used for confirmation. Sputum and urine samples were collected from each of 100 patients symptomatically diagnosed of PTB. Findings: Fifty-seven percent of the population was male while 43% were female. Mycobacterium tuberculosis was isolated from 9 (9%) of 100 patients. Similarly, GX detected Mycobacterium tuberculosis in 9 (9%) of the patients while the rate of detection using LAM was 10% and with ZN it was 7%. Gene xpert produced no true or false positive and negative result, LAM had one false positive result and ZN had two false negative results. The maximum time frame to generate result was 25 minutes for LAM, two hours for Gene xpert, eight weeks for culture and two days for ZN. Two positive isolates were observed at the same frequency for age group 21-30 and 31- 40 while age groups 1-10, 10-20, 41-50, 50-60 and above has 1 positive result each. Gene xpert had 98.11% sensitivity while LAM had 96.23% and ZN had 86.79%. The choice of ‘Point of Care’ diagnostic tool is of great concern to clinicians and the general public. Conclusion & Significance: This study identified LAM assay as suitable ‘Point of Care’ diagnostic and an add-on tool for PTB diagnosis because of its relatively high sensitivity and short maximum time frame to generate result compare to other three diagnostic techniques. \n  \n  \n ","PeriodicalId":389500,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Natural Sciences Engineering and Technology","volume":"13 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Natural Sciences Engineering and Technology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.51406/jnset.v19i1.2112","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Statement of the Problem: Tuberculosis remains a serious public-health threat in developing countries though it has been eradicated in some advanced countries. This disease constitutes a significant threat to global health, being the second highest cause of morbidity and mortality resulting from infectious agents. Prompt diagnosis of active TB facilitates timely therapeutic intervention and minimizes community transmission. Aim: This study aimed at determining a ‘Point of Care’ diagnostic tool for pulmonary tuberculosis (PTB) by comparing the efficiency of four different PTB diagnostic tools for different age groups. Methodology: Zeihl Nelson (ZN) staining, culture, Gene xpert (GX) and Lipoarabinomanan (LAM) assay were employed in this study The culture method was used for confirmation. Sputum and urine samples were collected from each of 100 patients symptomatically diagnosed of PTB. Findings: Fifty-seven percent of the population was male while 43% were female. Mycobacterium tuberculosis was isolated from 9 (9%) of 100 patients. Similarly, GX detected Mycobacterium tuberculosis in 9 (9%) of the patients while the rate of detection using LAM was 10% and with ZN it was 7%. Gene xpert produced no true or false positive and negative result, LAM had one false positive result and ZN had two false negative results. The maximum time frame to generate result was 25 minutes for LAM, two hours for Gene xpert, eight weeks for culture and two days for ZN. Two positive isolates were observed at the same frequency for age group 21-30 and 31- 40 while age groups 1-10, 10-20, 41-50, 50-60 and above has 1 positive result each. Gene xpert had 98.11% sensitivity while LAM had 96.23% and ZN had 86.79%. The choice of ‘Point of Care’ diagnostic tool is of great concern to clinicians and the general public. Conclusion & Significance: This study identified LAM assay as suitable ‘Point of Care’ diagnostic and an add-on tool for PTB diagnosis because of its relatively high sensitivity and short maximum time frame to generate result compare to other three diagnostic techniques.      
不同诊断技术对疑似结核病例结核分枝杆菌鉴定的比较评价
问题说明:结核病在发展中国家仍然是一个严重的公共卫生威胁,尽管它在一些发达国家已被根除。这种疾病对全球健康构成重大威胁,是传染性病原体造成的发病率和死亡率的第二大原因。及时诊断活动性结核病有助于及时进行治疗干预并最大限度地减少社区传播。目的:本研究旨在通过比较四种不同肺结核诊断工具对不同年龄组的效率,确定一种“护理点”肺结核诊断工具。方法:采用Zeihl Nelson (ZN)染色法、培养法、Gene xpert (GX)法和Lipoarabinomanan (LAM)法,采用培养法进行验证。收集100例经临床诊断为肺结核的患者的痰和尿液样本。调查结果:57%的人口是男性,43%是女性。100例患者中有9例(9%)分离到结核分枝杆菌。同样,GX在9例(9%)患者中检出结核分枝杆菌,而LAM的检出率为10%,ZN的检出率为7%。基因专家无真假阳性和阴性结果,LAM有1个假阳性结果,ZN有2个假阴性结果。LAM产生结果的最长时间为25分钟,Gene expert为2小时,培养8周,ZN为2天。21 ~ 30岁和31 ~ 40岁年龄组有2株阳性,1 ~ 10岁、10 ~ 20岁、41 ~ 50岁、50 ~ 60岁及以上年龄组各有1株阳性。基因专家的敏感性为98.11%,LAM为96.23%,ZN为86.79%。“护理点”诊断工具的选择是临床医生和公众非常关注的问题。结论与意义:与其他三种诊断技术相比,LAM检测具有相对较高的灵敏度和较短的产生结果的最长时间框架,因此该研究确定LAM检测是合适的“护理点”诊断和PTB诊断的附加工具。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信