Abstract
The recommendations for Mycobacterium tuberculosis drug susceptibility testing include both phenotypic and genotypic methods. This concurrent use of differing testing platforms has created an emerging challenge of discordant results, creating a diagnostic dilemma for the laboratorians as well as attending clinicians. We undertook a retrospective study to determine the prevalence of discordant results between the MTBDRplus line probe assay and solid culture-based drug susceptibility testing for rifampicin and isoniazid. The analysis was conducted for the period January 2013 and December 2015 at the Inkosi Albert Luthuli Central Hospital. Rifampicin and isoniazid resistance testing data were “paired” on 8273 isolates for culture-based drug susceptibility testing and line probe assay. The latter method showed high sensitivity and specificity of 93% and 95% respectively for isoniazid testing. For rifampicin testing, sensitivity and specificity were 95% and 75%. Overall, discordance was 14.6% for rifampicin and 7.2% for isoniazid. This report is not intended to determine superiority of one method over another. It is merely to show that discordance does exist between different methods of testing. Given the burden of HIV and Tuberculosis in Sub-Saharan Africa, these findings have clinical significance and huge public health implications. Clinicians should understand the limitations of phenotypic testing methods.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
More From: Journal of Clinical Tuberculosis and Other Mycobacterial Diseases
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.