Diagnostic accuracy of Xpert MTB/RIF Ultra and culture assays to detect Mycobacterium Tuberculosis using OMNIgene-sputum processed stool among adult TB presumptive patients in Uganda.
Journal
PloS one
ISSN: 1932-6203
Titre abrégé: PLoS One
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101285081
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2023
2023
Historique:
received:
14
10
2022
accepted:
22
03
2023
medline:
25
4
2023
pubmed:
21
4
2023
entrez:
21
04
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Stool is a potential sample for diagnosing Mycobacterium tuberculosis (Mtb) in patients with difficulty in expectorating. However, high mycobacterial culture contamination rates and Xpert MTB/RIF Ultra test error rates on stool samples have limited its use. OMNIgene SPUTUM (OM-S) is a sample transport reagent with characteristics of sputum decontamination while maintaining viable Mtb. We evaluated the impact of OM-S on Mtb diagnostic yield from stool using smear microscopy, Xpert MTB/RIF Ultra, and culture among presumptive TB patients. Paired stool and expectorated sputum samples were collected from consecutive Ugandan adults undergoing diagnostic evaluation for pulmonary TB between June 2018 and June 2019. Stool was divided into 2 portions: one was homogenized in OM-S (OM-S stool) and the other in PBS (PBS stool) as control. Both sputum and processed stool were tested for Mtb using concentrated smear fluorescence microscopy (CFM), Xpert MTB/RIF Ultra (Xpert) and Mycobacteria Growth Indicator Tube (MGIT) culture. Sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values for each test were calculated against sputum MGIT culture as the reference standard. Of the 200 participants, 120 (60%) were male, 73 (37%) were HIV positive (median CD4 120 cells/uL (IQR 43-297)) and 128 (64%) had confirmed pulmonary TB by sputum MGIT culture. Seven (4%) OM-S stool Xpert samples reported errors while 47 (25%) and 103 (61%) were contaminated on OM-S stool MGIT and PBS stool MGIT, respectively. OM-S stool MGIT was able to accurately diagnose 56 of the contaminated PBS stool MGIT samples compared to only 5 of the contaminated OM-S stool MGIT samples diagnosed by PBS stool MGIT. Sensitivity (95% Confidence Interval, CI) 89% (83-94) for OM-S stool Xpert was higher compared to that of OM-S stool MGIT 60% (51-69) and PBS stool MGIT 42% (32-52). Specificity (95%CI) 91% (82-97) was also higher for OM-S stool Xpert compared to OM-S stool MGIT 64% (51-75) and PBS stool MGIT 26% (16-38). Stool processed with OM-S showed potential to improve Mtb diagnostic yield and reduce rates of indeterminate results when tested on Xpert and MGIT culture. The method may thus be of value in Mtb detection among patients with difficulty to expectorate.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Stool is a potential sample for diagnosing Mycobacterium tuberculosis (Mtb) in patients with difficulty in expectorating. However, high mycobacterial culture contamination rates and Xpert MTB/RIF Ultra test error rates on stool samples have limited its use. OMNIgene SPUTUM (OM-S) is a sample transport reagent with characteristics of sputum decontamination while maintaining viable Mtb. We evaluated the impact of OM-S on Mtb diagnostic yield from stool using smear microscopy, Xpert MTB/RIF Ultra, and culture among presumptive TB patients.
METHODS
Paired stool and expectorated sputum samples were collected from consecutive Ugandan adults undergoing diagnostic evaluation for pulmonary TB between June 2018 and June 2019. Stool was divided into 2 portions: one was homogenized in OM-S (OM-S stool) and the other in PBS (PBS stool) as control. Both sputum and processed stool were tested for Mtb using concentrated smear fluorescence microscopy (CFM), Xpert MTB/RIF Ultra (Xpert) and Mycobacteria Growth Indicator Tube (MGIT) culture. Sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values for each test were calculated against sputum MGIT culture as the reference standard.
RESULTS
Of the 200 participants, 120 (60%) were male, 73 (37%) were HIV positive (median CD4 120 cells/uL (IQR 43-297)) and 128 (64%) had confirmed pulmonary TB by sputum MGIT culture. Seven (4%) OM-S stool Xpert samples reported errors while 47 (25%) and 103 (61%) were contaminated on OM-S stool MGIT and PBS stool MGIT, respectively. OM-S stool MGIT was able to accurately diagnose 56 of the contaminated PBS stool MGIT samples compared to only 5 of the contaminated OM-S stool MGIT samples diagnosed by PBS stool MGIT. Sensitivity (95% Confidence Interval, CI) 89% (83-94) for OM-S stool Xpert was higher compared to that of OM-S stool MGIT 60% (51-69) and PBS stool MGIT 42% (32-52). Specificity (95%CI) 91% (82-97) was also higher for OM-S stool Xpert compared to OM-S stool MGIT 64% (51-75) and PBS stool MGIT 26% (16-38).
CONCLUSION
Stool processed with OM-S showed potential to improve Mtb diagnostic yield and reduce rates of indeterminate results when tested on Xpert and MGIT culture. The method may thus be of value in Mtb detection among patients with difficulty to expectorate.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37083706
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0284041
pii: PONE-D-22-28442
pmc: PMC10121033
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e0284041Subventions
Organisme : NHLBI NIH HHS
ID : R01 HL128156
Pays : United States
Informations de copyright
Copyright: © 2023 Sessolo et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Références
Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2008 Dec;79(6):893-8
pubmed: 19052299
BMC Infect Dis. 2014 Dec 31;14:709
pubmed: 25599808
J Clin Microbiol. 2017 Dec;55(12):3355-3365
pubmed: 28904186
Microbiology (Reading). 2009 Jul;155(Pt 7):2384-2389
pubmed: 19389783
J Clin Microbiol. 2010 May;48(5):1820-6
pubmed: 20200293
Clin Infect Dis. 2013 Aug;57(3):e18-21
pubmed: 23580738
Tuberculosis (Edinb). 2016 Dec;101S:S105-S108
pubmed: 27727131
Int J Tuberc Lung Dis. 2013 Aug;17(8):1023-8
pubmed: 23827025
Lancet Respir Med. 2015 Jun;3(6):451-61
pubmed: 25812968
J Clin Microbiol. 2010 Jul;48(7):2495-501
pubmed: 20504986
J Clin Microbiol. 2000 Dec;38(12):4463-70
pubmed: 11101581
S Afr Med J. 2002 Jun;92(6):455-8
pubmed: 12146131
J Clin Microbiol. 2011 Apr;49(4):1202-5
pubmed: 21270230
Paediatr Respir Rev. 2011 Mar;12(1):16-21
pubmed: 21172670
Lancet Infect Dis. 2013 Jan;13(1):36-42
pubmed: 23134697
PLoS One. 2017 May 19;12(5):e0177529
pubmed: 28542255
Am Rev Respir Dis. 1963 May;87:775-9
pubmed: 13927224
Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2006 May 15;173(10):1078-90
pubmed: 16484674
BMC Res Notes. 2017 Sep 8;10(1):473
pubmed: 28886729
J Epidemiol Glob Health. 2017 Jun;7(2):103-109
pubmed: 28413105
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013 Jan 31;(1):CD009593
pubmed: 23440842
Int J Tuberc Lung Dis. 2017 Feb 1;21(2):161-166
pubmed: 28234079
PLoS One. 2018 Sep 13;13(9):e0203063
pubmed: 30212505
BMJ. 2012 Oct 24;345:e6717
pubmed: 23097549
Open Forum Infect Dis. 2015 May 22;2(2):ofv074
pubmed: 26125035
Med Sante Trop. 2016 Jan-Mar;26(1):97-100
pubmed: 26948101
PLoS One. 2016 Mar 23;11(3):e0151980
pubmed: 27007974
Pediatr Infect Dis J. 2017 Sep;36(9):837-843
pubmed: 28151842