Diagnostic Performance of Different Laboratory Methods for the Detection of Extrapulmonary Tuberculosis
Mohammad Khaja Mafij Uddin,Senjuti Kabir,Arfatur Rahman,Sabrina Choudhury,Rumana Nasrin,Tanjina Rahman,S. M. Mazidur Rahman,Shahriar Ahmed,Sayera Banu,Md. Fahim Ather
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms11041066
IF: 4.5
2023-04-19
Microorganisms
Abstract:Accurate and appropriate extrapulmonary tuberculosis (EPTB) diagnosis remains challenging due to its paucibacillary nature, requirement of invasive collection procedures, and lack of sensitive tests. This study investigated the diagnostic performance of different methods for the diagnosis of EPTB. A total of 1340 EPTB specimens were collected from presumptive EPTB patients from four different hospitals between November 2015 and March 2017. The collected specimens were tested with AFB microscopy, culture, Xpert MTB/RIF assay (Xpert), and MTBDRplus assay. Among the 1340 EPTB specimens, 49 (3.66%), 141 (10.52%), 166 (12.39%), and 154 (11.49%) were positive in AFB microscopy, culture, Xpert MTB/RIF, and MTBDRplus assay, respectively. A total of 194 (14.9%) cases were found positive in at least one of these methods. Using culture as a reference standard, the sensitivity and specificity of AFB microscopy, Xpert MTB/RIF, and MTBDRplus assay were: 27.0%/99.1%, 83.7%/96.0%, and 79.4%/96.5%, respectively. Compared to the composite reference standard, the sensitivity of culture, AFB microscopy, Xpert MTB/RIF, and MTBDRplus assay was 72.7%, 25.3%, 85.6%, and 79.4%, respectively, with a specificity of 100% for all the methods. The Xpert MTB/RIF assay showed the highest sensitivity compared to other methods. Considering the short turnaround time and promising findings, Xpert MTB/RIF assay should be integrated into national TB guidelines as a routine diagnostic test.
microbiology