Dataset Information

Preservation of sputum samples with cetylpyridinium chloride (CPC) for tuberculosis cultures and Xpert MTB/RIF in a low-income country.

ABSTRACT: Culture contamination with environmental bacteria is a major challenge in tuberculosis (TB) laboratories in hot and humid climate zones. We studied the effect of cetylpyridinium chloride (CPC) preservation on culture results and performance of Xpert MTB/RIF.Consecutive sputum samples from microscopy smear-positive TB patients were collected. Two-hundred samples were equally split in two aliquots, one aliquot was treated with CPC and stored at ambient temperature for 7 days. The second aliquot was immediately processed. Samples were decontaminated for 20, 15 or 10 min, and subsequently cultured on Löwenstein-Jensen medium. Furthermore, 50 samples were stored for 7, 14 and 21 days, and 100 CPC-pretreated samples tested by Xpert MTB/RIF.CPC pretreated samples showed a higher culture yield compared to non-treated sputum samples across all decontamination times: 94% vs. 73% at 10 min (p = 0.01), 94% vs. 64% at 15 min (p = 0.004), and 90% vs. 52% at 20 min (p < 0.001). The quantitative culture grading was consistently higher in CPC treated compared to non-CPC treated samples. The proportion of contaminated cultures was lower in CPC pretreated samples across all decontamination times (range 2-6%) compared to non-CPC treated samples (15-16%). For storage times of CPC treated samples of 7, 14, and 21 days, 84, 86, and 84% of the respective cultures were positive. Of 91 CPC treated samples with a positive culture, 90 were also Xpert MTB/RIF positive.CPC increases culture yield, decreases the proportion of contamination, and does not alter the performance of Xpert MTB/RIF.

SUBMITTER: Hiza H

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5543576 | biostudies-other | 2017 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundClinical tuberculosis diagnosis and empiric treatment have traditionally been common among patients with negative bacteriologic test results. Increasing availability of rapid molecular diagnostic tests, including Xpert MTB/RIF and the new Xpert Ultra cartridge, may alter the role of empiric treatment.MethodsWe prospectively enrolled outpatients age > = 15 who were evaluated for pulmonary tuberculosis at three health facilities in Kampala, Uganda. Using sputum mycobacterial culture, interviews, and clinical record abstraction, we estimated the accuracy of clinical diagnosis relative to Xpert and sputum culture and assessed the contribution of clinical diagnosis to case detection.ResultsOver a period of 9 months, 99 patients were diagnosed with pulmonary tuberculosis and subsequently completed sputum culture; they were matched to 196 patients receiving negative tuberculosis evaluations in the same facilities. Xpert was included in the evaluation of 291 (99%) patients. Compared to culture, Xpert had a sensitivity of 92% (95% confidence interval 83-97%) and specificity of 95% (92-98%). Twenty patients with negative Xpert were clinically diagnosed with tuberculosis and subsequently had their culture status determined; two (10%) were culture-positive. Considering all treated patients regardless of Xpert and culture data completeness, and considering treatment initiations before a positive Xpert (N = 4) to be empiric, 26/101 (26%) tuberculosis treatment courses were started empirically. Compared to sputum smear- or Xpert-positive patients with positive cultures, empirically-treated, Xpert-negative patients with negative cultures had higher prevalence of HIV (67% versus 37%), shorter duration of cough (median 4 versus 8 weeks), and lower inflammatory markers (median CRP 7 versus 101 mg/L).ConclusionJudged against sputum culture in a routine care setting of high HIV prevalence, the accuracy of Xpert was high. Clinical judgment identified a small number of additional culture-positive cases, but with poor specificity. Although clinicians should continue to prescribe tuberculosis treatment for Xpert-negative patients whose clinical presentations strongly suggest pulmonary tuberculosis, they should also carefully consider alternative diagnoses.

Project description:BackgroundXpert MTB/RIF Ultra (Xpert Ultra) might have higher sensitivity than its predecessor, Xpert MTB/RIF (Xpert), but its role in tuberculous meningitis diagnosis is uncertain. We aimed to compare Xpert Ultra with Xpert for the diagnosis of tuberculous meningitis in HIV-uninfected and HIV-infected adults.MethodsIn this prospective, randomised, diagnostic accuracy study, adults (≥16 years) with suspected tuberculous meningitis from a single centre in Vietnam were randomly assigned to cerebrospinal fluid testing by either Xpert Ultra or Xpert at baseline and, if treated for tuberculous meningitis, after 3-4 weeks of treatment. Test performance (sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values) was calculated for Xpert Ultra and Xpert and compared against clinical and mycobacterial culture reference standards. Analyses were done for all patients and by HIV status.FindingsBetween Oct 16, 2017, and Feb 10, 2019, 205 patients were randomly assigned to Xpert Ultra (n=103) or Xpert (n=102). The sensitivities of Xpert Ultra and Xpert for tuberculous meningitis diagnosis against a reference standard of definite, probable, and possible tuberculous meningitis were 47·2% (95% CI 34·4-60·3; 25 of 53 patients) for Xpert Ultra and 39·6% (27·6-53·1; 21 of 53) for Xpert (p=0·56); specificities were 100·0% (95% CI 92·0-100·0; 44 of 44) and 100·0% (92·6-100·0; 48 of 48), respectively. In HIV-negative patients, the sensitivity of Xpert Ultra was 38·9% (24·8-55·1; 14 of 36) versus 22·9% (12·1-39·0; eight of 35) by Xpert (p=0·23). In HIV co-infected patients, the sensitivities were 64·3% (38·8-83·7; nine of 14) for Xpert Ultra and 76·9% (49·7-91·8; ten of 13) for Xpert (p=0·77). Negative predictive values were 61·1% (49·6-71·5) for Xpert Ultra and 60·0% (49·0-70·0) for Xpert. Against a reference standard of mycobacterial culture, sensitivities were 90·9% (72·2-97·5; 20 of 22 patients) for Xpert Ultra and 81·8% (61·5-92·7; 18 of 22) for Xpert (p=0·66); specificities were 93·9% (85·4-97·6; 62 of 66) and 96·9% (89·5-91·2; 63 of 65), respectively. Six (22%) of 27 patients had a positive test by Xpert Ultra after 4 weeks of treatment versus two (9%) of 22 patients by Xpert.InterpretationXpert Ultra was not statistically superior to Xpert for the diagnosis of tuberculous meningitis in HIV-uninfected and HIV-infected adults. A negative Xpert Ultra or Xpert test does not rule out tuberculous meningitis. New diagnostic strategies are urgently required.FundingWellcome Trust and the Foundation for Innovative New Diagnostics.

Project description:IntroductionWorldwide, COVID-19 pandemic lead to a large fall in the number of newly reported TB cases. In sub-Saharan Africa, microbiological diagnosis of TB is generally based on smear microscopy and Xpert MTB/RIF on sputum samples, but good quality sputum samples are often difficult to obtain, leading clinicians to rely on more invasive procedures for diagnosis. Aim of this study was to investigate pooled sensitivity and specificity of Xpert MTB/RIF on stool samples compared to respiratory microbiological reference standards in African countries.MethodsFour investigators independently searched PubMed, SCOPUS, and Web of Science until 12th October 2022, then screened titles and abstracts of all potentially eligible articles. The authors applied the eligibility criteria, considered the full texts. All the studies reported the data regarding true positive (TP), true negative (TN), false positive (FP) and false negative (FN). Risk of bias and applicability concerns were assessed with the Quadas-2 tool.Resultsoverall, among 130 papers initially screened, we evaluated 47 works, finally including 13 papers for a total of 2,352 participants, mainly children. The mean percentage of females was 49.6%, whilst the mean percentage of patients reporting HIV was 27.7%. Pooled sensitivity for Xpert MTB/RIF assay for detecting pulmonary tuberculosis was 68.2% (95%CI: 61.1-74.7%) even if characterized by a high heterogeneity (I2=53.7%). Specificity was almost 100% (99%, 95%CI: 97-100%; I2 = 45.7%). When divided for reference standard, in the six studies using sputum and nasogastric aspirate the accuracy was optimal (AUC = 0.99, SE = 0.02), whilst in the studies using only sputum for tuberculosis detection the AUC was 0.85 (with a SE = 0.16). The most common source of bias was exclusion of enrolled patients in the analysis.ConclusionsOur study confirms that, in Africa, stool Xpert MTB/RIF may be a useful rule-in test for children above and below 5 years of age under evaluation for pulmonary tuberculosis. Sensitivity increased substantially when using both sputum and nasogastric aspirate as reference samples.

Project description:The aim of this study was to evaluate the performance of Xpert MTB/RIF Ultra (Ultra) compared with its predecessor, Xpert MTB/RIF (Xpert), in the diagnosis of tuberculosis (TB) in a low TB incidence country. Retrospective analysis was performed on 689 clinical samples received between 2015 and 2018, on which Xpert was performed, and on 715 samples, received between 2018 and 2020, on which Ultra was performed. Samples were pulmonary (n = 830) and extrapulmonary (n = 574) in nature, and a total of 264 were culture positive for Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex (MTBC). The diagnostic performance of both assays was analyzed using culture as the reference standard. The sensitivity of Ultra for culture positive (smear positive and smear negative) MTBC samples, was 93.2% (110/118) compared with 82.2% (120/146) for Xpert (P = 0.0078). In smear negative-culture positive samples, Ultra had a sensitivity of 74.2% (23/31) versus 36.11% (13/36) for Xpert (P = 0.0018). Specificity of both assays was comparable at 94.8% (566/597) for Ultra and 95.8% (520/543) for Xpert (P = 0.4475). The sensitivity of Ultra and Xpert assays among exclusively pulmonary samples was 95.3% (82/86) and 90.3% (84/93), respectively (P = 0.1955), and 87.5% (28/32) and 67.9% (36/53), respectively, among extrapulmonary samples (P = 0.0426). Ultra showed improved performance compared with Xpert in a low TB incidence setting, particularly in smear negative and extrapulmonary MTBC disease. The specificity of Ultra was lower than Xpert, however, this was not statistically significant. IMPORTANCE The study demonstrates the improved sensitivity of the Ultra compared with the Xpert, particularly in smear negative TB disease, for both pulmonary and extrapulmonary samples in a low TB incidence setting. Cycle threshold (Ct) value for both assays was found to positively correlate with time to TB culture positivity, suggesting that Ct and semiquantitative results could be used as indicators of sample MTBC bacillary burden, and thus, perhaps, of transmission potential. This may have implications for the designation of patient isolation precautions.

Dataset Information

Preservation of sputum samples with cetylpyridinium chloride (CPC) for tuberculosis cultures and Xpert MTB/RIF in a low-income country.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets