Diagnostic Yield of Direct Smear, Concentrated Smear, Liquid Culture, and GeneXpert by Sputum Induction in Smear-Negative Pulmonary Tuberculosis Patients
A. Sivaprakasam, V. Gangadharan, G. Karthiga, P. Anandeswari
Citation Information :
Sivaprakasam A, Gangadharan V, Karthiga G, Anandeswari P. Diagnostic Yield of Direct Smear, Concentrated Smear, Liquid Culture, and GeneXpert by Sputum Induction in Smear-Negative Pulmonary Tuberculosis Patients. Indian J Respir Care 2022; 11 (4):310-313.
Background: Spontaneous sputum smear gave negative results in clinically and radiologically suspected pulmonary tuberculosis (TB) patients. Hence, the study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic yield of induced sputum with direct smear, concentrated smear, liquid culture, and GeneXpert.
Materials and Methods: This cross-sectional study was conducted on clinically and radiographically suspected TB patients who were sputum smear-negative; 88 sputum smear-negative patients underwent sputum induction, and the samples were tested for direct smear, concentrated smear, liquid culture, and GeneXpert. Descriptive analysis was carried out for frequency and proportion for categorical variables and mean and standard deviation for quantitative variables. Diagnostic yield was calculated for each test. Data analyzed using coGuide software, V.1.03.
Results: The mean age of the study population was 46.87 ± 15.09 years, and male participants were the majority. The diagnostic yield of induced sputum was 19.29% compared to a direct smear. Diagnostic yield was 59.25%, 80.70%, and 94.73% for concentrated smears, liquid culture, and GeneXpert, respectively.
Conclusion: Induced sputum gave a high diagnostic yield in smear-negative pulmonary TB. With induced sputum, GeneXpert gave maximum yield compared to direct smear, concentrated smear, and liquid culture.
WHO. Global Tuberculosis Report 2014. World Health Organization; 2014. Available from: http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/91355/1/9789241564656_eng.pdf. [Last accessed on 2021 Mar 10].
Evans CA. GeneXpert – A game-changer for tuberculosis control? PLoS Med 2011;8:e1001064.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Updated guidelines for the use of nucleic acid amplification tests in the diagnosis of tuberculosis. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2009;58:7-10.
Diagnostic Standards and Classification of Tuberculosis in Adults and Children. This official statement of the American Thoracic Society and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention was adopted by the ATS Board of Directors, July 1999. This statement was endorsed by the Council of the Infectious Disease Society of America, September 1999. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2000;161:1376-95.
Conde MB, Soares SL, Mello FC, Rezende VM, Almeida LL, Reingold AL, et al. Comparison of sputum induction with fiberoptic bronchoscopy in the diagnosis of tuberculosis: Experience at an acquired immune deficiency syndrome reference center in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2000;162:2238-40.
Hepple P, Ford N, McNerney R. Microscopy compared to culture for the diagnosis of tuberculosis in induced sputum samples: A systematic review. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis 2012;16:579-88.
BDSS Corp. Released 2020. coGuide Statistics software, Version 1.0, India: BDSS corp. Available from: https://www.coguide.in. [Last accessed on 2021 Dec 22].
Gonzalez-Angulo Y, Wiysonge CS, Geldenhuys H, Hanekom W, Mahomed H, Hussey G, et al. Sputum induction for the diagnosis of pulmonary tuberculosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 2012;31:1619-30.
Schoch OD, Rieder P, Tueller C, Altpeter E, Zellweger JP, Rieder HL, et al. Diagnostic yield of sputum, induced sputum, and bronchoscopy after radiologic tuberculosis screening. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2007;175:80-6.
Luhadia A, Kapur M, Luhadia SK, Sharma RK, Chhabra G, Sharma S. Comparison of induced sputum and fibre-optic bronchoscopy (Fob) in the early diagnosis of sputum smear negative suspected cases of pulmonary tuberculosis under Rntcp settings - A Study conducted in Southern part of Rajasthan. J Pulm Respir Med. 2017;7:2.
Sumalani KK, Akhter N, Chawla D, Rizvi NA. Diagnostic yield of sputum induction in patients with pleural tuberculosis at a tertiary care hospital in Karachi. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis 2019;23:1213-6.
Macías A, Sánchez-Montalvá A, Salvador F, Villar A, Tórtola T, Saborit N, et al. Epidemiology and diagnosis of pleural tuberculosis in a low incidence country with high rate of immigrant population: A retrospective study. Int J Infect Dis 2019;78:34-8.
Hopewell PC, Pai M, Maher D, Uplekar M, Raviglione MC. International standards for tuberculosis care. Lancet Infect Dis 2006;6:57.
Gordin F, Slutkin G. The validity of acid-fast smears in the diagnosis of pulmonary tuberculosis. Arch Pathol Lab Med 1990;114:1025-7.
Lipsky BA, Gates J, Tenover FC, Plorde JJ. Factors affecting the clinical value of microscopy for acid-fast bacilli. Rev Infect Dis 1984;6:214-22.
Woods GL, Pentony E, Boxley MJ Gatson GA. Concentration of sputum by cytocentrifugation for preparation of smears for detection of acid-fast bacilli does not increase sensitivity of the fluorochrome stain. J Clin Microbiol 1995;33:1915-6.
A study of the characteristics and course of sputum smear-negative pulmonary tuberculosis. Tubercle 1981;62:155-67.
Toman K. What are the main causes of false-positive and false-negative sputum smears? Toman's Tuberculosis. Case Detection, Treatment and Monitoring. 2nd ed. Publisher: World Health Organization, Geneva; 2004. p. 23-7.
Narain R, Nair SS, Naganna K, Chandrasekhar P, Rao GR, Lal P. Problems in defining a “case” of pulmonary tuberculosis in prevalence surveys. Bull World Health Organ 1968;39:701-29.
Saglam L, Akgun M, Aktas E. Usefulness of induced sputum and fibreoptic bronchoscopy specimens in the diagnosis of pulmonary tuberculosis. J Int Med Res 2005;33:260-5.
Gopathi NR, Mandava V, Namballa UR, Makala S. A comparative study of induced sputum and bronchial washings in diagnosing sputum smear negative pulmonary tuberculosis. J Clin Diagn Res 2016;10:C07-10.
