Kurien Roshan, Sudarsanam Thambu David, Thomas Kurien
Medicine Unit 2, Christian Medical College, Vellore, TN India.
Oman Med J. 2013 May;28(3):163-6. doi: 10.5001/omj.2013.47.
Tuberculous meningitis (TBM) is a major clinical and public health problem, both for diagnosis and management. We compare two established scoring systems, Thwaites and the Lancet consensus scoring system for the diagnosis of TB and compare the clinical outcome in a tertiary care setting.
We analyzed 306 patients with central nervous system (CNS) infection over a 5-year period and classified them based on the unit's diagnosis, the Thwaites classification as well as the newer Lancet consensus scoring system. Patients with discordant results-reasons for discordance as well as differences in outcome were also analyzed.
Among the 306 patients, the final diagnosis of the treating physician was TBM in 84.6% (260/306), acute CNS infections in 9.5% (29/306), pyogenic meningitis in 4.2% (13/306) and aseptic meningitis in 1.3% (4/306). Among these 306 patients, 284 (92.8%) were classified as "TBM" by the Thwaites" score and the rest as "Pyogenic". The Lancet score on these patients classified 29 cases (9.5%) as 'Definite-TBM', 43 cases (14.1%) as "Probable-TBM", 186 cases (60.8%) as "Possible-TBM" and the rest as "Non TBM". There was moderate agreement between the unit diagnosis and Thwaites classification (Kappa statistic = 0.53), as well as the Lancet scoring systems. There is only moderate agreement between the Thwaites classification as well as the Lancet scoring systems. It was noted that 32/ 284 (11%) of patients who were classified as TBM by the Thwaites system were classified as "Non TBM" by the Lancet score and 6/258 (2%) of those who were diagnosed as possible, probable or definite TB were classified as Non TB by the Thwaites score. However, patients who had discordant results between these scores were not different from those who had concordant results when treatment was initiated based on expert clinical evaluation in the tertiary care setting.
There was only moderate agreement between the Thwaites' score and the Lancet consensus scoring systems. There is need to prospectively evaluate the cost effectiveness of simple but more effective rapid diagnostic alogrithm in the diagnosis of TB, particularly in a setting without CT and MRI facilities.
结核性脑膜炎(TBM)无论是在诊断还是管理方面,都是一个重大的临床和公共卫生问题。我们比较两种既定的评分系统,即用于结核病诊断的斯韦茨评分系统和《柳叶刀》共识评分系统,并比较在三级医疗环境中的临床结果。
我们分析了5年间306例中枢神经系统(CNS)感染患者,并根据科室诊断、斯韦茨分类以及更新的《柳叶刀》共识评分系统对他们进行分类。还分析了结果不一致的患者——不一致的原因以及结果差异。
在306例患者中,主治医生的最终诊断为TBM的占84.6%(260/306),急性CNS感染的占9.5%(29/306),化脓性脑膜炎的占4.2%(13/306),无菌性脑膜炎的占1.3%(4/306)。在这306例患者中,根据斯韦茨评分,284例(92.8%)被归类为“TBM”,其余的归类为“化脓性”。这些患者的《柳叶刀》评分将29例(9.5%)归类为“确诊-TBM”,43例(14.1%)归类为“可能-TBM”,186例(60.8%)归类为“可能-TBM”,其余的归类为“非TBM”。科室诊断与斯韦茨分类之间(卡方统计量=0.53)以及与《柳叶刀》评分系统之间存在中度一致性。斯韦茨分类与《柳叶刀》评分系统之间也只有中度一致性。值得注意的是,在斯韦茨系统中被归类为TBM的患者中有32/284(11%)在《柳叶刀》评分中被归类为“非TBM”,而在被诊断为可能、很可能或确诊结核病的患者中有6/258(2%)在斯韦茨评分中被归类为非结核病。然而,在三级医疗环境中,当根据专家临床评估开始治疗时,这些评分结果不一致的患者与结果一致的患者并无差异。
斯韦茨评分与《柳叶刀》共识评分系统之间只有中度一致性。有必要前瞻性地评估简单但更有效的快速诊断算法在结核病诊断中的成本效益,特别是在没有CT和MRI设备的环境中。