24 research outputs found

    Cost-effectiveness analysis of PCR for the rapid diagnosis of pulmonary tuberculosis

    Get PDF
    <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Tuberculosis is one of the most prominent health problems in the world, causing 1.75 million deaths each year. Rapid clinical diagnosis is important in patients who have co-morbidities such as Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) infection. Direct microscopy has low sensitivity and culture takes 3 to 6 weeks <abbrgrp><abbr bid="B1">1</abbr><abbr bid="B2">2</abbr><abbr bid="B3">3</abbr></abbrgrp>. Therefore, new tools for TB diagnosis are necessary, especially in health settings with a high prevalence of HIV/TB co-infection.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>In a public reference TB/HIV hospital in Brazil, we compared the cost-effectiveness of diagnostic strategies for diagnosis of pulmonary TB: Acid fast bacilli smear microscopy by Ziehl-Neelsen staining (AFB smear) plus culture and AFB smear plus colorimetric test (PCR dot-blot).</p> <p>From May 2003 to May 2004, sputum was collected consecutively from PTB suspects attending the Parthenon Reference Hospital. Sputum samples were examined by AFB smear, culture, and PCR dot-blot. The gold standard was a positive culture combined with the definition of clinical PTB. Cost analysis included health services and patient costs.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The AFB smear plus PCR dot-blot require the lowest laboratory investment for equipment (US20,000).Thetotalscreeningcostsare3.8timesforAFBsmearpluscultureversusforAFBsmearplusPCRdotblotcosts(US 20,000). The total screening costs are 3.8 times for AFB smear plus culture versus for AFB smear plus PCR dot blot costs (US 5,635,760 versus US1,498,660).CostspercorrectlydiagnosedcasewereUS 1,498, 660). Costs per correctly diagnosed case were US 50,773 and US13,749forAFBsmearpluscultureandAFBsmearplusPCRdotblot,respectively.AFBsmearplusPCRdotblotwasmorecosteffectivethanAFBsmearplusculture,whenthecostoftreatingallcorrectlydiagnosedcaseswasconsidered.Thecostofreturningpatients,whicharenottreatedduetoanegativeresult,tothehealthservice,washigherinAFBsmearplusculturethanforAFBsmearplusPCRdotblot,US 13,749 for AFB smear plus culture and AFB smear plus PCR dot-blot, respectively. AFB smear plus PCR dot-blot was more cost-effective than AFB smear plus culture, when the cost of treating all correctly diagnosed cases was considered. The cost of returning patients, which are not treated due to a negative result, to the health service, was higher in AFB smear plus culture than for AFB smear plus PCR dot-blot, US 374,778,045 and US$ 110,849,055, respectively.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>AFB smear associated with PCR dot-blot associated has the potential to be a cost-effective tool in the fight against PTB for patients attended in the TB/HIV reference hospital.</p

    Comparison of two laboratory-developed PCR methods for the diagnosis of Pulmonary Tuberculosis in Brazilian patients with and without HIV infection

    Get PDF
    <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Direct smear examination with Ziehl-Neelsen (ZN) staining for the diagnosis of pulmonary tuberculosis (PTB) is cheap and easy to use, but its low sensitivity is a major drawback, particularly in HIV seropositive patients. As such, new tools for laboratory diagnosis are urgently needed to improve the case detection rate, especially in regions with a high prevalence of TB and HIV.</p> <p>Objective</p> <p>To evaluate the performance of two <it>in house </it>PCR (Polymerase Chain Reaction): PCR dot-blot methodology (PCR dot-blot) and PCR agarose gel electrophoresis (PCR-AG) for the diagnosis of Pulmonary Tuberculosis (PTB) in HIV seropositive and HIV seronegative patients.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A prospective study was conducted (from May 2003 to May 2004) in a TB/HIV reference hospital. Sputum specimens from 277 PTB suspects were tested by Acid Fast Bacilli (AFB) smear, Culture and <it>in house </it>PCR assays (PCR dot-blot and PCR-AG) and their performances evaluated. Positive cultures combined with the definition of clinical pulmonary TB were employed as the gold standard.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The overall prevalence of PTB was 46% (128/277); in HIV<sup>+</sup>, prevalence was 54.0% (40/74). The sensitivity and specificity of PCR dot-blot were 74% (CI 95%; 66.1%-81.2%) and 85% (CI 95%; 78.8%-90.3%); and of PCR-AG were 43% (CI 95%; 34.5%-51.6%) and 76% (CI 95%; 69.2%-82.8%), respectively. For HIV seropositive and HIV seronegative samples, sensitivities of PCR dot-blot (72% vs 75%; p = 0.46) and PCR-AG (42% vs 43%; p = 0.54) were similar. Among HIV seronegative patients and PTB suspects, ROC analysis presented the following values for the AFB smear (0.837), Culture (0.926), PCR dot-blot (0.801) and PCR-AG (0.599). In HIV seropositive patients, these area values were (0.713), (0.900), (0.789) and (0.595), respectively.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Results of this study demonstrate that the <it>in house </it>PCR dot blot may be an improvement for ruling out PTB diagnosis in PTB suspects assisted at hospitals with a high prevalence of TB/HIV.</p
    corecore