ABSTRACT
The incidence and clinical characteristics of NTM diseases in Brazil remain relatively unknown. The present study describes the diagnosis of NTM isolates, the clinical presentation and treatment outcomes. We analyzed NTM isolates in patients of a tertiary hospital in the Southeast region of Brazil, from January 2008 to July 2019. The ATS/IDSA criteria for diagnosis and treatment of these patients was applied. Mycobacterium kansasii were identified in 13/113 (11.5%) patients. In 59/113 (52.2%) patients who met the ATS criteria for disease, 29/59 (49.1%) received treatment, and 22/29 (75.8%) were cured. The major species identified was M. kansasii. The most frequent symptoms among the treated patients were dyspnea and cough, and the proportion of cured patients was high.
Subject(s)
Mycobacterium Infections, Nontuberculous , Nontuberculous Mycobacteria , Humans , Mycobacterium Infections, Nontuberculous/diagnosis , Mycobacterium Infections, Nontuberculous/drug therapy , Mycobacterium Infections, Nontuberculous/epidemiology , Cough , Dyspnea , Hospitals , Retrospective StudiesABSTRACT
ABSTRACT The incidence and clinical characteristics of NTM diseases in Brazil remain relatively unknown. The present study describes the diagnosis of NTM isolates, the clinical presentation and treatment outcomes. We analyzed NTM isolates in patients of a tertiary hospital in the Southeast region of Brazil, from January 2008 to July 2019. The ATS/IDSA criteria for diagnosis and treatment of these patients was applied. Mycobacterium kansasii were identified in 13/113 (11.5%) patients. In 59/113 (52.2%) patients who met the ATS criteria for disease, 29/59 (49.1%) received treatment, and 22/29 (75.8%) were cured. The major species identified was M. kansasii. The most frequent symptoms among the treated patients were dyspnea and cough, and the proportion of cured patients was high.
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Rapid and accurate tuberculosis detection is critical for improving patient diagnosis and decreasing tuberculosis transmission. Molecular assays can significantly increase laboratory costs; therefore, the average time and economic impact should be evaluated before implementing a new technology. The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost and average turnaround time of smear microscopy and Xpert assay at a university hospital. METHODS: The turnaround time and cost of the laboratory diagnosis of tuberculosis were calculated based on the mean cost and activity based costing (ABC). RESULTS: The average turnaround time for smear microscopy was 16.6 hours while that for Xpert was 24.1 hours. The Xpert had a mean cost of USD 17.37 with an ABC of USD 10.86, while smear microscopy had a mean cost of USD 13.31 with an ABC of USD 6.01. The sensitivity of smear microscopy was 42.9% and its specificity was 99.1%, while the Xpert assay had a sensitivity of 100% and a specificity of 96.7%. CONCLUSIONS: The Xpert assay has high accuracy; however, the turnaround time and cost of smear microscopy were lower than those of Xpert.
Subject(s)
Biological Assay/economics , Pathology, Molecular/economics , Tuberculosis, Pulmonary/diagnosis , Biological Assay/methods , Costs and Cost Analysis , Humans , Microscopy , Mycobacterium tuberculosis , Pathology, Molecular/methods , Sensitivity and Specificity , Tuberculosis , Tuberculosis, Pulmonary/economicsABSTRACT
Abstract INTRODUCTION: Rapid and accurate tuberculosis detection is critical for improving patient diagnosis and decreasing tuberculosis transmission. Molecular assays can significantly increase laboratory costs; therefore, the average time and economic impact should be evaluated before implementing a new technology. The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost and average turnaround time of smear microscopy and Xpert assay at a university hospital. METHODS: The turnaround time and cost of the laboratory diagnosis of tuberculosis were calculated based on the mean cost and activity based costing (ABC). RESULTS: The average turnaround time for smear microscopy was 16.6 hours while that for Xpert was 24.1 hours. The Xpert had a mean cost of USD 17.37 with an ABC of USD 10.86, while smear microscopy had a mean cost of USD 13.31 with an ABC of USD 6.01. The sensitivity of smear microscopy was 42.9% and its specificity was 99.1%, while the Xpert assay had a sensitivity of 100% and a specificity of 96.7%. CONCLUSIONS: The Xpert assay has high accuracy; however, the turnaround time and cost of smear microscopy were lower than those of Xpert.
