Zijenah Lynn Sodai, Kadzirange Gerard, Bandason Tsitsi, Chipiti Maria Mary, Gwambiwa Bevel, Makoga Forget, Chungu Pauline, Kaguru Philip, Dheda Keertan
Departments of Immunology, University of Zimbabwe College of Health Sciences, Harare, Zimbabwe.
Departments of Medicine, University of Zimbabwe College of Health Sciences, Harare, Zimbabwe.
BMC Infect Dis. 2016 Jan 22;16:20. doi: 10.1186/s12879-016-1339-z.
In Zimbabwe, sputum smear microscopy (SSM) is the routinely used TB diagnostic tool in hospitalised HIV-infected patients. However, SSM has poor sensitivity in HIV-infected patients. We compared performance of urine lipoarabinomannan strip test (LAM) and SSM among hospitalized HIV-infected patients with suspected TB.
Hospitalized HIV-infected patients with suspected TB were randomized to LAM plus SSM or SSM alone groups as part of a larger multi-country parent study. Here we present a comparison of LAM versus SSM performance from the Zimbabwe study site. LAM analyses (grade 2 cut-off) were conducted using (i) a microbiological reference standard (MRS; culture positivity for M.tb and designated definite TB) and (ii) a composite reference standard (CRS; definite TB plus probable TB i.e. patients with clinical TB excluded from the culture negative group). CRS constituted the primary analysis.
82/457 (18%) of the patients randomized to the LAM group were M.tuberculosis culture positive. Using CRS, sensitivity (%, 95% CI) of LAM was significantly higher than SSM [49.2 (42.1-56.4) versus 29.4(23.2-36.3); p < 0.001]. Specificity and PPV were 98.1%, and 95.8%, respectively. By contrast, using MRS, LAM sensitivity was similar to SSM and specificity was significantly lower, however, the combined sensitivity of LAM and SSM was significantly higher than that of SSM alone, p = 0.009. Using CRS, LAM sensitivity (%, CI) was CD4 count dependent [60.6(50.7-69.8) at ≤50 cells/μL; 40.0(22.7-59.4) at 51-100 cells/μL, and 32.8(21.0-46.3) at >100 cells/μL. The combined sensitivity of LAM and SSM was higher than SSM alone being highest at CD4 counts <50 cells/μL [67.6(57.9-76.3); p = <0.001]. Specificity of LAM or SSM alone, or of combined LAM and SSM was >97% in all the 3 CD4 strata.
Among hospitalized HIV-infected patients with suspected TB, the sensitivity of LAM is significantly higher than that of SSM, especially at low CD4 counts. LAM and SSM are complimentary tests for diagnosis of TB in HIV-infected patients. We recommend a combination of LAM and SSM for TB diagnosis in HIV-infected patients with low CD4 counts in HIV/TB co-endemic countries, where alternative methods are unavailable.
在津巴布韦,痰涂片显微镜检查(SSM)是住院HIV感染患者常用的结核病诊断工具。然而,SSM在HIV感染患者中的敏感性较差。我们比较了住院疑似结核病的HIV感染患者中尿脂阿拉伯甘露聚糖试纸条检测(LAM)和SSM的性能。
作为一项更大规模多国母研究的一部分,将住院疑似结核病的HIV感染患者随机分为LAM联合SSM组或单独SSM组。在此,我们展示了来自津巴布韦研究地点的LAM与SSM性能的比较。LAM分析(二级临界值)使用(i)微生物学参考标准(MRS;结核分枝杆菌培养阳性并确诊为确诊结核病)和(ii)综合参考标准(CRS;确诊结核病加可能结核病,即从培养阴性组中排除临床结核病患者)进行。CRS构成主要分析。
随机分配到LAM组的患者中82/457(18%)结核分枝杆菌培养阳性。使用CRS时,LAM的敏感性(%,95%CI)显著高于SSM[49.2(42.1 - 56.4)对29.4(23.2 - 36.3);p < 0.001]。特异性和阳性预测值分别为98.1%和95.8%。相比之下,使用MRS时,LAM敏感性与SSM相似,特异性显著较低,然而,LAM和SSM的联合敏感性显著高于单独的SSM,p = 0.009。使用CRS时,LAM敏感性(%,CI)取决于CD4细胞计数[≤50个细胞/μL时为60.6(50.7 - 69.8);51 - 100个细胞/μL时为40.0(22.7 - 59.4),>100个细胞/μL时为32.8(21.0 - 46.3)]。LAM和SSM的联合敏感性高于单独的SSM,在CD4细胞计数<50个细胞/μL时最高[67.6(57.9 - 76.3);p = <0.001]。在所有3个CD4分层中,单独的LAM或SSM以及LAM和SSM联合的特异性均>97%。
在住院疑似结核病的HIV感染患者中,LAM的敏感性显著高于SSM,尤其是在低CD4细胞计数时。LAM和SSM是HIV感染患者结核病诊断的互补检测方法。我们建议在没有替代方法的HIV/TB共同流行国家,对于CD4细胞计数低的HIV感染患者,联合使用LAM和SSM进行结核病诊断。