Case Report: Diagnostic Pitfalls in an Atypical Case of Primary Neuritic Leprosy.

Primary neuritic leprosy is a form of leprosy clinically limited to the peripheral nerves without obvious skin lesions. Diagnosing leprosy in the absence of typical dermatological features is challenging and often causes a delay in diagnosis. We describe a case of primary neuritic leprosy with atypical features and the roles that histological confirmation using nerve biopsy of an unenlarged nerve and newer techniques, such as polymerase chain reaction and high-resolution ultrasonography, play in improving the diagnosis.

Isolation of Mycobacterium lepromatosis and Development of Molecular Diagnostic Assays to Distinguish Mycobacterium leprae and M. lepromatosis.

BACKGROUND: Mycobacterium leprae was thought to be the exclusive causative agent of leprosy until Mycobacterium lepromatosis was identified in a rare form of leprosy known as diffuse lepromatous leprosy (DLL). METHODS: We isolated M. lepromatosis from a patient with DLL and propagated it in athymic nude mouse footpads. Genomic analysis of this strain (NHDP-385) identified a unique repetitive element, RLPM, on which a specific real-time quantitative polymerase chain reaction assay was developed. The RLPM assay, and a previously developed RLEP quantitative polymerase chain reaction assay for M. leprae, were validated as clinical diagnostic assays according to Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments guidelines. We tested DNA from archived histological sections, patient specimens from the United States, Philippines, and Mexico, and US wild armadillos. RESULTS: The limit of detection for the RLEP and RLPM assays is 30 M. leprae per specimen (0.76 bacilli per reaction; coefficient of variation, 0.65%-2.44%) and 122 M. lepromatosis per specimen (3.05 bacilli per reaction; 0.84%-2.9%), respectively. In histological sections (n = 10), 1 lepromatous leprosy (LL), 1 DLL, and 3 Lucio reactions contained M. lepromatosis; 2 LL and 2 Lucio reactions contained M. leprae; and 1 LL reaction contained both species. M. lepromatosis was detected in 3 of 218 US biopsy specimens (1.38%). All Philippines specimens (n = 180) were M. lepromatosis negative and M. leprae positive. Conversely, 15 of 47 Mexican specimens (31.91%) were positive for M. lepromatosis, 19 of 47 (40.43%) were positive for M. leprae, and 2 of 47 (4.26%) contained both organisms. All armadillos were M. lepromatosis negative. CONCLUSIONS: The RLPM and RLEP assays will aid healthcare providers in the clinical diagnosis and surveillance of leprosy.

Gridlock from diagnosis to treatment of multidrug-resistant tuberculosis in Tanzania: low accessibility of molecular diagnostic services and lack of healthcare worker empowerment in 28 districts of 5 high burden TB regions with mixed methods evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB) outcomes are adversely impacted by delay in diagnosis and treatment. METHODS: Mixed qualitative and quantitative approaches were utilized to identify healthcare system related barriers to implementation of molecular diagnostics for MDR-TB. Randomly sampled districts from the 5 highest TB burden regions were enrolled during the 4th quarter of 2016. District TB & Leprosy Coordinators (DTLCs), and District AIDS Coordinators (DACs) were interviewed, along with staff from all laboratories within the selected districts where molecular diagnostics tests for MDR-TB were performed. Furthermore, the 2015 registers were audited for all drug-susceptible but retreatment TB cases and TB collaborative practices in HIV clinics, as these patients were in principal targeted for drug susceptibility testing by rapid molecular diagnostics. RESULTS: Twenty-eight TB districts from the 5 regions had 399 patients reviewed for retreatment with a drug-susceptible regimen. Only 160 (40%) had specimens collected for drug-susceptibility testing, and of those specimens only 120 (75%) had results communicated back to the clinic. MDR-TB was diagnosed in 16 (13.3%) of the 120 specimens but only 12 total patients were ultimately referred for treatment. Furthermore, among the HIV/AIDS clinics served in 2015, the median number of clients with TB diagnosis was 92 cases [IQR 32-157] yet only 2 people living with HIV were diagnosed with MDR-TB throughout the surveyed districts. Furthermore, the districts generated 53 front-line healthcare workers for interviews. DTLCs with intermediate or no knowledge on the clinical application of XpertMTB/RIF were 3 (11%), and 10 (39%), and DACs with intermediate or no knowledge were 0 (0%) and 2 (8%) respectively (p = 0.02). Additionally, 11 (100%) of the laboratories surveyed had only the 4-module XpertMTB/RIF equipment. The median time that XpertMTB/RIF was not functional in the 12 months prior to the investigation was 2 months (IQR 1-4). CONCLUSIONS: Underutilization of molecular diagnostics in high-risk groups was a function of a lack of front-line healthcare workforce empowerment and training, and a lack of equipment access, which likely contributed to the observed delay in MDR-TB diagnosis in Tanzania.

Presence of Mycobacterium leprae DNA and PGL-1 antigen in household contacts of leprosy patients from a hyperendemic area in Brazil.

Leprosy is a highly infectious disease endemic to underdeveloped countries. In Maranhão State, Northeastern Brazil, the hyperendemic rate of 56.11 cases/100,000 inhabitants increased the necessity of better understanding the epidemiological profile of this population, particularly regarding efficient methods for evaluating individuals residing with diagnosed patients to understand disease transmission and the risk of infection. In this study, we examined the percentage of contacts with positive indices for Mycobacterium leprae DNA and phenol-glycolipid-1 antigen (PGL-1). PGL-1 was analyzed by an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay, the ML-Flow test, and polymerase chain reaction of oral and nasal secretions of 808 leprosy contacts from Maranhão. PGL-1 was detected in 14.0% of patients and differed by operational classification of the index case (P < 0.05). Seropositive results of ML-Flow were 15.0% and identified individuals with and without Bacillus Calmette-Guérin vaccine scars. Molecular diagnosis detected M. leprae DNA in 5.6% of oral samples and 4.6% of nasal tissues, and 87% of subjects resided with high bacillary load patients. This study reinforces the efficacy of combining molecular and serological techniques to identify potential bacillus carriers in the asymptomatic stage of infection, such as in household contacts, highlighting the importance of these meth-ods for monitoring hyperendemic populations.

Evaluación de diferentes muestras para la detección molecular de Mycobacterium leprae en Cuba / Evaluation of different samples for Mycobacterium leprae molecular detection in Cuba

Introducción: en la actualidad, la principal estrategia para controlar la infección por Mycobacterium leprae es la detección precoz y la multiterapia. El objetivo del presente estudio fue evaluar la utilidad del empleo de diferentes muestras clínicas en el diagnóstico molecular de la infección por M. leprae. Métodos: se evaluaron 22 pacientes con clínica sugestiva de lepra. Se tomaron muestras de linfa de cuatro puntos (ambos lóbulos auriculares y ambos codos) recogidas en una lámina porta objetos (lámina de baciloscopía) y en un hisopo, además muestra de hisopado nasal, muestra de sangre total y de tejido de la lesión. Las muestras se analizaron mediante baciloscopía, histología y PCR según correspondió en cada caso. Por otro lado, para determinar la sensibilidad y especificidad del método, se realizó un estudio de casos y controles en el que se emplearon 40 láminas de baciloscopías negativas de pacientes con lepra paucibacilar y 40 láminas negativas de personas sin lepra. Resultados: el 54,5 por ciento de los pacientes resultó positivo por baciloscopía. Solo en el 41 por ciento de los pacientes la histología tuvo resultados concluyentes de lepra. En el 100 por ciento de los pacientes se detectó la presencia de ADN de M. leprae a partir de la lámina de baciloscopía y el hisopado de linfa. En el 95,45 por ciento de los pacientes se pudo amplificar la secuencia diana a partir de la sangre total y solo en el 31,8 por ciento de los pacientes el hisopado nasal resultó positivo. El estudio de casos y controles mostró que la sensibilidad y especificidad de la PCR respecto al diagnóstico convencional fue de 100 por ciento. Conclusión: el diagnóstico de M. leprae mediante PCR, es de gran utilidad cuando las técnicas convencionales no son concluyentes. La lámina de baciloscopía y el hisopado de linfa constituyen las muestras clínicas más útiles para la confirmación molecular de la infección por M. leprae(AU)

Introduction: Currently, the early detection and treatment with multitherapy are the main strategy to control the infection by Mycobacterium leprae. The objective of the present study was to evaluate the usefulness of different clinical samples for molecular diagnosis of M. leprae infection. Methods: Twenty two patients with suggestive clinical leprosy were analyzed. Different clinical samples were taken by slit skin smear, histopathology and PCR. To determine the sensitivity and specificity of the PCR method, a case-control study was also performed using 40 slides from negative smears of patients with leprosy paucibacillary and 40 from individuals without leprosy. Results: From all patient studied fifty-four percent were positive by slit skin smear and 41 percent were conclusive of leprosy by histopathology. M. leprae DNA was detected in slit skin smears and lymph swabs in 100 percent of patients. In 95,45 percent of patients were detected M. leprae DNA in whole blood and in 31,8 percent of them in nasal swab. The sensitivity of PCR respect to conventional diagnostic was 100 percent, the specificity was 97.5 percent, and the positive predictive value was 97.56 and the negative predictive value was100 percent. Conclusion: The diagnosis of M. leprae by PCR is very useful when conventional techniques are inconclusive. The slit skin smears and lymph swabs are the most useful clinical samples for molecular confirmation of infection with M. leprae(AU)

[Inflammatory dermatoses]. / Entzündliche Dermatitiden.

The seven basic patterns of inflammatory dermatoses according to Ackerman can be applied to infectious dermatoses. However, it should be borne in mind that infection caused by one agent may induce differing patterns according to the stage of disease. Dermatophytosis and the arthropod reaction belong to perivascular dermatoses with spongiosis. Secondary syphilis and acrodermatitis chronica atrophicans regularly show a lichenoid infiltrate with interface dermatitis, whereas epidermal involvement is typically absent in erythema migrans, virus exanthema and bacillary angiomatosis. Lupus vulgaris, atypic mycobacteriosis, lepra, actinomycosis, cutaneous leishmaniosis and erysipelas belong to the nodular and diffuse dermatoses. In the group of vasculitides, septic vasculitis is induced by a biological agent, and the pattern of vesicular dermatitis is reflected by infections with herpes viruses, impetigo contagiosa and staphylococcal scalded-skin syndrome. Follicular dermatitis shows a pattern of furuncles and carbuncles which are mainly caused by bacteria or fungi.

Extraction and detection of Mycobacterium leprae DNA from ZNCF-stained skin smear slides for better identification of negative skin smears.

Abstract Identification of Mycobacterium leprae, which causes leprosy, is done by Ziehl Neelsen Carbol Fuchsin (ZNCF) stained slit skin smear microscopy that aids in the diagnosis and quantification of approximate bacterial load carried by the patient. We attempted M. leprae DNA extraction from 46 stained slit skin smear negative slides, using Proteinase K and SDS lysis, followed by ethanol precipitation. M. leprae specific primers (16SrRNA) were used for PCR-based amplification of DNA. We could detect M. leprae DNA in 15 (32.6%) samples. The method can be useful in the diagnosis of apparently slit skin smear negative leprosy cases.