Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Institute of Public Health, College of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Gondar, Gondar, Ethiopia.
PLoS One. 2021 Feb 18;16(2):e0246938. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0246938. eCollection 2021.
To end Tuberculosis (TB) by 2030, early detection and timely treatment of Drug-Resistant Tuberculosis (DR-TB) is vital. The role of rapid, accurate, and sensitive DR-TB diagnostic tool is indispensable to accelerate the TB control program. There are evidence breaks in the time difference and its effect on treatment outcomes among different DR-TB diagnostic tools in Ethiopia. This article aimed to compare the different DR-TB diagnostic tools with time pointers and evaluate their effect on the treatment outcomes.
We performed a retrospective chart review of 574 DR-TB patients from September 2010 to December 2017 to compare the impact of molecular DR-TB diagnostic tests (Xpert MTB/RIF, Line Probe Assay (LPA), and solid culture-based Drug Susceptibility Testing (DST)) on time to diagnosis, treatment initiation, and treatment Outcomes. Kruskual-Wallis test was employed to assess the presence of a significant difference in median time among the DR-TB diagnostic tests. Chi-Square and Fisher exact tests were used to test the presence of relations between treatment outcome and diagnostic tests.
The data of 574 DR-TB patients were included in the analysis. From these, 321, 173, and 80 patients were diagnosed using Xpert MTB/RIF, Line Probe Assay (LPA), and solid culture-based DST, respectively. The median time in a day with (Interquartile range (IQR)) for Xpert MTB/RIF, LPA, and solid culture-based DST was from a first care-seeking visit to diagnosis: 2(0, 9), 4(1, 55), and 70(18, 182), from diagnosis to treatment initiation: 3(1, 8), 33(4, 76), and 44(9, 145), and from a first care-seeking visit to treatment initiation: 4(1, 11), 3(1, 12) and 76(3.75, 191) respectively. The shorter median time was observed in the Xpert MTB/RIF followed by the LPA, and this was statistically significant with a p-value <0.001. There was no statistically significant difference concerning treatment outcomes among the three DST tests.
Xpert MTB/RIF can mitigate the transmission of DR-TB significantly via quick diagnosis and treatment initiation followed by LPA as equating to the solid culture base DST, particularly in smear-positive patients. However, we didn't see a statistically significant impact in terms of treatment outcomes. Xpert MTB/RIF can be used as the first test to diagnose DR-TB by further complimenting solid culture base DST to grasp the drug-resistance profile.
要在 2030 年终结结核病(TB),早期发现和及时治疗耐药结核病(DR-TB)至关重要。快速、准确、灵敏的 DR-TB 诊断工具对于加速结核病控制计划是不可或缺的。在不同的 DR-TB 诊断工具之间,存在着时间差异及其对治疗结果的影响的证据差距。本文旨在比较不同的 DR-TB 诊断工具与时间指标,并评估它们对治疗结果的影响。
我们对 2010 年 9 月至 2017 年 12 月的 574 例 DR-TB 患者进行了回顾性图表审查,以比较分子 DR-TB 诊断测试(Xpert MTB/RIF、线性探针分析(LPA)和基于固体培养的药物敏感性测试(DST))对诊断、治疗开始和治疗结果的影响。采用 Kruskual-Wallis 检验评估 DR-TB 诊断测试之间中位数时间是否存在显著差异。采用卡方检验和 Fisher 确切概率法检验治疗结果与诊断测试之间的关系。
纳入了 574 例 DR-TB 患者的数据进行分析。其中,321、173 和 80 例患者分别使用 Xpert MTB/RIF、LPA 和固体培养 DST 进行诊断。Xpert MTB/RIF、LPA 和固体培养 DST 从首次就诊到诊断的中位数时间为 2(0,9)、4(1,55)和 70(18,182);从诊断到治疗开始的中位数时间为 3(1,8)、33(4,76)和 44(9,145);从首次就诊到治疗开始的中位数时间为 4(1,11)、3(1,12)和 76(3.75,191)。Xpert MTB/RIF 的中位数时间最短,其次是 LPA,具有统计学意义(p 值<0.001)。三种 DST 测试在治疗结果方面没有统计学差异。
Xpert MTB/RIF 通过快速诊断和治疗开始,可以显著减轻 DR-TB 的传播,随后是 LPA,与固体培养基础 DST 相当,特别是在涂片阳性患者中。然而,我们没有看到在治疗结果方面有统计学意义的影响。Xpert MTB/RIF 可作为诊断 DR-TB 的首选测试,进一步补充固体培养基础 DST 以掌握耐药谱。