Drug Resistance in Osteoarticular Tuberculosis: A Study From an Endemic Zone.

Abstract

The present study was undertaken to determine the incidence of drug resistance against anti-tubercular drugs among patients from an endemic zone. Methodology: Forty consecutive clinico-radiologically diagnosed patients of osteoarticular tuberculosis (29: spine, 11: extraspinal) were enrolled. Pus from needle aspiration was taken in 31 cases, tissue following spinal decompression in seven, synovial in one, and sinus edge biopsy in one. The pus/tissue was subjected to acid-fast bacilli (AFB) staining and liquid culture, sensitivity to 13 anti-tubercular drugs (Isoniazid (INH), rifampicin (RIF), kanamycin (KAN), amikacin (AMK,) capreomycin (CAP), ethionamide (ETH), levofloxacin (LEV), moxifloxacin (MOX), linezolid (LNZ), para-amino-salicylic acid (PAS), bedaquiline (BDQ), delamanid (DLM), and clofazimine (CFO)) were checked, and histopathological/cytopathological examination and molecular tests were performed. Results: The mean age of patients was 29.07(9-65) years; 21 were female and 19 were male. The diagnostic accuracy for tuberculosis was 20% by AFB smear, 65% by liquid culture, 82.5% by histopathology, and 90% by cartridge-based nucleic acid amplification testing (CBNAAT). All culture-positive isolates were identified as Mycobacterium tuberculosis with no non-tubercular Mycobacterium. The drug resistance detected on CBNAAT was 11.1%, line probe assay (LPA) first line was 15.4%, LPA second line was 4%, and liquid drug susceptibility testing (DST) 11.5%. We detected 15.4% INHresistance, 11.1% RIF, 7.6% LEV, 3.8% MOX and PAS. No resistance was detected against second-line injectable drugs (SLID), ETH, LNZ, BDQ, DLM, and CFO. Conclusions: No single laboratory modality can ascertain the diagnosis in all cases; hence, samples should be sent for all tests in tandem. In the presence of insufficient samples, tissue may be subjected to CBNAAT and histopathology to arrive at tissue diagnosis. In this subset, overall drug resistance incidence was 12.5% (5/40) with one patient each of isolated INH and RIF resistance, one of multidrug-resistance (MDR), and two of pre-extensively drug-resistant (pre-XDR). Primary drug resistance came out to be 11.1% (4/36) with one patient each of isolated INH and RIF resistance, one ofMDR, and one Pre-XDR.