TY - JOUR
T1 - Prospective cross-sectional evaluation of the small membrane filtration method for diagnosis of pulmonary tuberculosis
AU - Jones-López, Edward
AU - Manabe, Yukari C.
AU - Palaci, Moises
AU - Kayiza, Carol
AU - Armstrong, Derek
AU - Nakiyingi, Lydia
AU - Ssengooba, Willy
AU - Gaeddert, Mary
AU - Kubiak, Rachel
AU - Almeida, Pedro
AU - Alland, David
AU - Dietze, Reynaldo
AU - Joloba, Moses
AU - Ellner, Jerrold J.
AU - Dorman, Susan E.
PY - 2014/7
Y1 - 2014/7
N2 - Smear microscopy has suboptimal sensitivity, and there is a need to improve its performance since it is commonly used to diagnose tuberculosis (TB). We prospectively evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of the small membrane filtration (SMF) method, an approach that uses a vacuum manifold and is designed to concentrate bacilli onto a filter that can be examined microscopically. We enrolled hospitalized adults suspected to have pulmonary TB in Kampala, Uganda. We obtained a clinical history and three spontaneously expectorated sputum specimens for smear microscopy (direct, concentrated, and SMF), MGIT (mycobacterial growth indicator tube) 960 and Lowenstein-Jensen (LJ) cultures, and Xpert MTB/RIF testing. We performed per-specimen (primary) and per-patient analyses. From October 2012 to June 2013, we enrolled 212 patients (579 sputum specimens). The participants were mostly female (63.2%), and 81.6% were HIV infected; their median CD4 cell count was 47 cells/μl. Overall, 19.0%, 20.4%, 27.1%, 25.2%, and 25.9% of specimens tested positive by direct smear, concentrated smear, MGIT culture, LJ culture, and Xpert test, respectively. In the per-specimen analysis, the sensitivity of the SMF method (48.5%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 37.4 to 59.6) was lower than those of direct smear (60.9%; 51.4 to 70.5 [P=0.0001]) and concentrated smear (63.3%; 53.6 to 73.1 [P<0.0001]). Subgroup analyses showed that SMF performed poorly in specimens having a low volume or low bacterial load. The SMF method performed poorly compared to standard smear techniques and was sensitive to sample preparation techniques. The optimal laboratory SMF protocol may require striking a fine balance between sample dilution and filtration failure rate.
AB - Smear microscopy has suboptimal sensitivity, and there is a need to improve its performance since it is commonly used to diagnose tuberculosis (TB). We prospectively evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of the small membrane filtration (SMF) method, an approach that uses a vacuum manifold and is designed to concentrate bacilli onto a filter that can be examined microscopically. We enrolled hospitalized adults suspected to have pulmonary TB in Kampala, Uganda. We obtained a clinical history and three spontaneously expectorated sputum specimens for smear microscopy (direct, concentrated, and SMF), MGIT (mycobacterial growth indicator tube) 960 and Lowenstein-Jensen (LJ) cultures, and Xpert MTB/RIF testing. We performed per-specimen (primary) and per-patient analyses. From October 2012 to June 2013, we enrolled 212 patients (579 sputum specimens). The participants were mostly female (63.2%), and 81.6% were HIV infected; their median CD4 cell count was 47 cells/μl. Overall, 19.0%, 20.4%, 27.1%, 25.2%, and 25.9% of specimens tested positive by direct smear, concentrated smear, MGIT culture, LJ culture, and Xpert test, respectively. In the per-specimen analysis, the sensitivity of the SMF method (48.5%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 37.4 to 59.6) was lower than those of direct smear (60.9%; 51.4 to 70.5 [P=0.0001]) and concentrated smear (63.3%; 53.6 to 73.1 [P<0.0001]). Subgroup analyses showed that SMF performed poorly in specimens having a low volume or low bacterial load. The SMF method performed poorly compared to standard smear techniques and was sensitive to sample preparation techniques. The optimal laboratory SMF protocol may require striking a fine balance between sample dilution and filtration failure rate.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84903788762&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84903788762&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1128/JCM.00642-14
DO - 10.1128/JCM.00642-14
M3 - Article
C2 - 24808236
AN - SCOPUS:84903788762
SN - 0095-1137
VL - 52
SP - 2513
EP - 2520
JO - Journal of clinical microbiology
JF - Journal of clinical microbiology
IS - 7
ER -