The Role of Cartridge-Based Nucleic Acid Amplification Test (CBNAAT), Line Probe Assay (LPA), Liquid Culture, Acid-Fast Bacilli (AFB) Smear and Histopathology in the Diagnosis of Osteoarticular Tuberculosis.
Cartridge-based nucleic acid amplification test
Histopathology
Line probe assay
Molecular genotypic methods
Multidrug-resistant tuberculosis
Osteoarticular tuberculosis
Phenotypic methods
Presumptive drug-resistant tuberculosis
Presumptive tuberculosis
Spinal tuberculosis
Journal
Indian journal of orthopaedics
ISSN: 0019-5413
Titre abrégé: Indian J Orthop
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 0137736
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
May 2021
May 2021
Historique:
received:
07
08
2020
accepted:
05
12
2020
entrez:
14
6
2021
pubmed:
15
6
2021
medline:
15
6
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
There is a paucity of data on the role of molecular methods in the diagnosis of osteoarticular tuberculosis. The present study was conducted to define the role of molecular (CBNAAT, LPA), phenotypic (AFB smear and culture) and histopathological evaluation in the diagnosis of osteoarticular TB. Seventy-seven consecutive cases of osteoarticular tuberculosis were grouped into presumptive TB cases (group A) and presumptive drug-resistant cases (group B). Tissue samples obtained were submitted for CBNAAT, LPA, AFB smear, liquid culture and histological examinations. The diagnostic accuracy of each test was reported against histologically diagnosed cases and in all tests in tandem. Group A and group B had 65 and 12 cases, respectively. The diagnostic accuracy for tuberculosis was 84.62% by CBNAAT, 70.77% by LPA, 86.15% by molecular tests (combined), 47.69% by AFB smear, 50.77% by liquid culture and 87.69% by histology in group A, and 91.67% for CBNAAT, 83.33% for LPA, 91.67% for molecular tests (combined), 25% for AFB smear, 16.67% for liquid culture and 83.33% for histology in group B. The drug resistance detection rate was 4.62% on CBNAAT, 3.08% on LPA, 6.15% on molecular tests (combined) and 1.54% on DST in group A, while it was 33.33% on CBNAAT, 58.33% on LPA, 58.33% on molecular tests (combined) and 16.67% on DST among group B cases. Similar sensitivity rates for the various tests were obtained among both the groups on comparison with histology (taken as denominator). The addition of molecular methods increased the overall diagnostic accuracy (all tests in tandem) from 93.8 to 100% in group A and from 83.3 to 100% in group B cases. No single tests could diagnose tuberculosis in all cases; hence, samples should be evaluated by molecular tests (CBNAAT and LPA), AFB smear, culture and histological examinations simultaneously. The molecular tests have better demonstration of drug resistance from mycobacterial culture. The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s43465-020-00326-w.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
There is a paucity of data on the role of molecular methods in the diagnosis of osteoarticular tuberculosis. The present study was conducted to define the role of molecular (CBNAAT, LPA), phenotypic (AFB smear and culture) and histopathological evaluation in the diagnosis of osteoarticular TB.
METHODS
METHODS
Seventy-seven consecutive cases of osteoarticular tuberculosis were grouped into presumptive TB cases (group A) and presumptive drug-resistant cases (group B). Tissue samples obtained were submitted for CBNAAT, LPA, AFB smear, liquid culture and histological examinations. The diagnostic accuracy of each test was reported against histologically diagnosed cases and in all tests in tandem.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Group A and group B had 65 and 12 cases, respectively. The diagnostic accuracy for tuberculosis was 84.62% by CBNAAT, 70.77% by LPA, 86.15% by molecular tests (combined), 47.69% by AFB smear, 50.77% by liquid culture and 87.69% by histology in group A, and 91.67% for CBNAAT, 83.33% for LPA, 91.67% for molecular tests (combined), 25% for AFB smear, 16.67% for liquid culture and 83.33% for histology in group B. The drug resistance detection rate was 4.62% on CBNAAT, 3.08% on LPA, 6.15% on molecular tests (combined) and 1.54% on DST in group A, while it was 33.33% on CBNAAT, 58.33% on LPA, 58.33% on molecular tests (combined) and 16.67% on DST among group B cases. Similar sensitivity rates for the various tests were obtained among both the groups on comparison with histology (taken as denominator). The addition of molecular methods increased the overall diagnostic accuracy (all tests in tandem) from 93.8 to 100% in group A and from 83.3 to 100% in group B cases.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
No single tests could diagnose tuberculosis in all cases; hence, samples should be evaluated by molecular tests (CBNAAT and LPA), AFB smear, culture and histological examinations simultaneously. The molecular tests have better demonstration of drug resistance from mycobacterial culture.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
BACKGROUND
The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s43465-020-00326-w.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34122769
doi: 10.1007/s43465-020-00326-w
pii: 326
pmc: PMC8149538
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
157-166Informations de copyright
© Indian Orthopaedics Association 2021.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Ethical statementThe authors declare that the above manuscript is in compliance with ethical standards for research in human participants, and have no potential sources of conflict of interest associated with its publication. All participants involved were recruited only from UCMS and GTB hospital, Delhi, after getting an appropriate ethical clearance from the institutional board and after taking an informed consent. All procedures were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.Conflict of interestThe authors also declare that we have nothing to disclose and have no direct or indirect commercial and or financial incentive associated with this research.
Références
J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1975 Feb;57(1):13-23
pubmed: 46867
Acta Orthop Scand. 1974;45(1):36-42
pubmed: 4217554
Asian Spine J. 2016 Oct;10(5):850-856
pubmed: 27790312
Bone Joint J. 2014 Oct;96-B(10):1366-9
pubmed: 25274923
Emerg Microbes Infect. 2018 Jun 20;7(1):109
pubmed: 29921972
PLoS One. 2017 Aug 22;12(8):e0182988
pubmed: 28829779
Int J Infect Dis. 2015 Jul;36:27-30
pubmed: 26004172
Indian J Orthop. 2008 Apr;42(2):173-7
pubmed: 19826523
Indian J Tuberc. 2018 Oct;65(4):296-302
pubmed: 30522616
Int J Mycobacteriol. 2017 Jan-Mar;6(1):87-93
pubmed: 28317811
PLoS One. 2017 Jan 12;12(1):e0169798
pubmed: 28081227
J Infect Dev Ctries. 2009 Aug 30;3(7):511-6
pubmed: 19762969
J Thorac Dis. 2016 Jun;8(6):1205-9
pubmed: 27293838
Indian J Med Microbiol. 2017 Jul-Sep;35(3):323-331
pubmed: 29063875
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2007 Jul;460:2-3
pubmed: 17620802
Asian Spine J. 2014 Feb;8(1):97-111
pubmed: 24596613
J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2010 Jul;92(7):905-13
pubmed: 20595106
Indian J Orthop. 2018 Mar-Apr;52(2):100-107
pubmed: 29576636
J Spinal Cord Med. 2011;34(5):440-54
pubmed: 22118251
Pediatr Infect Dis J. 2016 Nov;35(11):1165-1168
pubmed: 27286562
J Clin Microbiol. 2011 Jul;49(7):2540-5
pubmed: 21593262