Analysis of Discordance between Genotypic and Phenotypic Assays for Rifampicin-Resistant Mycobacterium tuberculosis Isolated from Healthcare Facilities in Mthatha

对从姆塔塔医疗机构分离的利福平耐药结核分枝杆菌的基因型和表型检测结果不一致性的分析

阅读:1

Abstract

The study sought to determine the rate of discordant results between genotypic and phenotypic tests for the diagnosis of drug-resistant tuberculosis (DR-TB). Sputum samples and cultured isolates from suspected DR-TB patients were, respectively, analyzed for Mycobacterium tuberculosis by Xpert(®) MTB/RIF (Cepheid, Sunnyvale, CA, USA) and line probe assays (LPA) (Hain, Nehren, Germany). Discrepant rifampicin (RMP)-resistant results were confirmed using BACTEC MGIT960 (BD, New York, NY, USA). Of the 224 RMP-resistant results obtained by Xpert MTB/RIF, 5.4% were susceptible to RMP by LPA. MGIT960 showed a 75% agreement with LPA. The discrepancy was attributed to either heteroresistance or DNA contamination during LPA testing in 58.3% of cases. In 25% of the samples showing agreement in RMP resistance between Xpert MTB/RIF and MGIT960, the discrepancy was attributed to laboratory errors causing false RMP susceptible results with LPA. In 16.7% of the cases, the discrepancy was attributed to false RMP susceptible results with Xpert MTB/RIF. Out of the 224 isolates, susceptibility to isoniazid (INH) by LPA was performed in 73.7% RMP-resistant isolates, of which, 80.6% were resistant. All RMP-resistant isolates by Xpert MTB/RIF were confirmed in 98.5% by LPA if TB isolates were resistant to INH, but were only confirmed in 81.3% if TB isolates were susceptible to INH (p < 0.001). In conclusion, laboratory errors should be considered when investigating discordant results.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。