RESUMO
The susceptibility of 211 clinical isolates of Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex (201 M. tuberculosis and 10 Mycobacterium bovis isolates) to pyrazinamide (PZA) was assessed by the nonradiometric Bactec MGIT 960 system (M960). Detection of PZA resistance was followed by a repeat testing using a reduced inoculum (RI) of 0.25 ml instead of 0.5 ml. According to the first M960 analysis, resistance was observed in 55 samples. In the RI assay, 32 samples turned out to be susceptible and 23 proved to be resistant (58.2% false positivity). The Bactec 460 assay confirmed as resistant those strains detected by the RI assay, while discrepant results were found susceptible. Mutation analysis performed on 13 M. tuberculosis isolates detected pncA mutations in 11 samples. On the basis of our data, we suggest using the RI assay to confirm all PZA resistance results obtained with the standard M960 assay. Further studies are required to confirm our findings.
Assuntos
Antituberculosos/farmacologia , Farmacorresistência Bacteriana , Reações Falso-Positivas , Mycobacterium bovis/efeitos dos fármacos , Mycobacterium tuberculosis/efeitos dos fármacos , Pirazinamida/farmacologia , Humanos , Testes de Sensibilidade Microbiana/métodos , Mycobacterium bovis/isolamento & purificação , Mycobacterium tuberculosis/isolamento & purificação , Tuberculose/microbiologiaRESUMO
From June 2006 to December 2007, 3,648 clinical specimens consecutively received for mycobacterial culture were investigated. Each processed sample was inoculated into Bactec MGIT 960 liquid medium and a Löwenstein-Jensen slant. Tubes that were flagged as positive by the instrument as well as those determined to be negative after 42 days of incubation were removed, visually inspected for growth, and checked for the presence of acid-fast bacilli. Three hundred sixty-nine mycobacterial strains were recovered; of the 44 Mycobacterium xenopi isolates recovered by MGIT medium, only 13 were detected by the instrument (P<0.0001). Most tubes yielding M. xenopi exhibited a peculiar pattern of growth characterized by a scant number of round, yellow-pigmented granules instead of the fine, evenly dispersed clumps usually observed for mycobacteria. It is suggested to check all individual tubes discarded by the MGIT 960 system at the end of the incubation period to prevent a significant amount of previously undetected growth from being missed.
Assuntos
Técnicas Bacteriológicas/métodos , Infecções por Mycobacterium não Tuberculosas/diagnóstico , Infecções por Mycobacterium não Tuberculosas/microbiologia , Mycobacterium xenopi/isolamento & purificação , Humanos , Mycobacterium xenopi/classificação , Sensibilidade e EspecificidadeRESUMO
BACKGROUND: The Xpert MTB/RIF assay (Xpert) is an automated molecular test for the detection of tuberculosis and rifampin resistance (RIF-R), but it lacks sensitivity in smear-negative samples and some limitations in determination of RIF-R have also been reported. The new Xpert MTB/RIF Ultra (Ultra) was developed to overcome these limitations. We aimed to compare Ultra and Xpert diagnostic accuracy setting culture and drug susceptibility testing as reference standards. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed on 359 consecutive, respiratory (269) and extrapulmonary (90) specimens collected from 340 patients investigated for TB along a two-year period. Patients presenting at primary health-care centres and hospitals were recruited on the basis of symptoms and abnormal X-ray imaging. One-hundred seventy-four subjects were identified to have active tuberculosis by culture and 2 were MDR. FINDINGS: Sensitivities of Ultra and Xpert were 87% and 75% for the 48 individuals with smear-negative and culture-positive respiratory TB (difference of 12%, 95% CI 3 to 21); 95% and 72% for the 40 individuals with smear-negative and culture-positive extrapulmonary disease (22%, 95% CI 10 to 34); and 95% and 86%, respectively, across all 174 individuals with culture-positive samples (8.5%, 95% CI 4.5 to 12.5). Specificities of Ultra and Xpert for tuberculosis case detection were 98% and 100% (-2.0%, 95% CI -4.3 to +0.3). Ultra and Xpert performed equal in detecting RIF-R. INTERPRETATION: Sensitivity of Ultra was superior to that of Xpert in all categories of clinical samples. However, improved sensitivity was associated with a modest reduction in specificity.