A Comparative Assessment of Petroff’s and N-Acetyl-L-Cysteine- Sodium Hydroxide Method in the Diagnosis of Pulmonary Tuberculosis
ASSESSMENT OF PETROFF’S AND N-ACETYL-L-CYSTEINE- SODIUM HYDROXIDE METHOD IN THE DIAGNOSIS OF PULMONARY TUBERCULOSIS
Tuberculosis (TB) stays one of the deadliest communicable disease and responsible for almost two million deaths every year worldwide. The objective of the present study is to compare Petroff’s and N-acetyl-L cysteine- sodium hydroxide methods used for the diagnosis of pulmonary tuberculosis. This present study was conducted in the department of ST John’s Medical college and Hospital, Bangalore, from October 2011 to September 2012. Total 100 sputum specimen was collected from patients under the Revised National Tuberculosis Control Program (RNTCP) Guidelines. These samples were decontaminated with Petroff’s and NALC- NaOH Method and same were processed for L J culturing and incubated at 37˚C. As per result analysis, out of total 100 sputum sample, 64 % smears were positive by petroff’’s methods and 69 % smears were positive by NALC - NAOH methods. The positivity rate was increased by NALC – NAOH method. All samples were cultured on LJ medium for bacterial growth. A maximum number of cultures were positive by NALC – NAOH method (53 %) and Petroff”smethod (51 %). This study concludes that NALC-NaOH method is effective and provides valid and rapid results. This method can be used for routine diagnosis and for better sensitivity of Mycobacterium growth. There is further multicentric research is required in respect of targeting larger population for better effective outcomes.
Keywords: Tuberculosis, Petroff’s, NALC- NaOH Method, Sputum, L J Culture
2. Esra Ekbic Kadioglu, Elif Yilmazel Ucar, Omer Araz..A Comparison of Two Different Culture Methods for Use in the Diagnosis of Pulmonary Tuberculosis. Eurasian J Med, 2014; 46(2): 74–77.
3. Raviglione M, Sulis G. Tuberculosis: Burden, Challenges and Strategy for Control and Elimination. Infect Dis Rep 2016;(8):65-70.
4. Maartens G, Wilkinson RJ. Tuberculosis. Lancet, 2007;370:2030-43.
5. World Health Organization. 2015 Global Tuberculosis Report. Geneva, Switzerland: WHO, 2015.
6. TB India 2012. Revised National Tuberculosis TB Control Programme Annual Status Report. Central TB Division, Directorate General of Health Services, New Delhi. I G Printers Pvt Ltd. P 8.
7. Chaudhary SK, Mishra B. Comparison of hypertonic saline-sodium hydroxide method with modified Petroff’s method for the decontamination of sputum samples. Int J Infect Microbiol, 2013; 2(3):78-81.
8. WHO] World Health Organization. Laboratory services in tuberculosis control Part II: Microscopy. WHO/TB/98.258. Geneva: World Health Organization. 1998.
9. Ratnam S, Stead F A, Howes M. Simplified acetylcysteine-alkali digestion decontamination procedure for isolation of mycobacteria from clinical specimens. J Clin Microbiol, 1987; 25: 1428–1432.
10. Yajko D M, Nassos P S, Sanders C A, et al. Comparison of four decontamination methods for recovery of Mycobacterium avium complex from stools. J Clin Microbiol 1993; 31: 302–306.
11. Manual of standard operating procedures (SOPs) -Revised National Tuberculosis Control Programme,Central Tuberculosis division Directorate General of Health services Ministry of health and family welfare,Nirman Bhavan, New Delhi.
12. Bhattacharya S, Ray R, Roy Chowdhury N, Dasgupta A, Dastidar SG. Comparison of a novel bilayered medium with the conventional media for cultivation of Mycobacterium tuberculosis. Indian J Med Res, 2009;130:561–6.
13. Rajpal S, Dhingra VK, Aggarwal JK. Sputum grading as predictor of treatment outcome in pulmonary tuberculosis. Indian J Tuberc. 2002;49:139–41.
14. Salem JI, Marója MF, LitaiffLR,Cardoso MS, et al. Valor relativo do examedireto, apósconcentração porcultivo de escarro no diagnósticobacteriológico da tuberculosepulmonar no Amazonas. JP neumol, 1990;16:133-6.
15. Cruickshank R, Duguid IP, Maimion BP, Swain RHA. Medical Microbiology. Ed 12th vol 2. Edinburgh 1975.Churchill Livingstone. P. 390.
16. Kent PT, Kubica GP: Public health mycobacteriology: A guidefor level III laboratory Atlanta, 1985, Centers for disease control Available from National Technical information Service, spring-field, Va.
17. Kubica GP, Kaufmann, AJ Dye WE. Comments on the use of the new mucolytic agents N-acetyl-L-cysteine, as a sputum digestant for the isolation of mycobacteria. Am Rev Respire Dis, 1964; 89:284.
18. Kent P.T., and G.P. Kubica. 1985. Public Health Mycobacteriology. A Guide for the Level III Laboratory. U.S. Depatment of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control, Altlanta, GA.
19. Ananthanarayan R, Paniker CKJ. Mycobacterium I:Tuberculosis. In Ananthanarayan and Paniker’s Textbook of Microbiology. 8th ed. Universities Press (India) Pvt Ltd. p 353.
20. Peres RL, Maciel EL, Pinheiro C et al. Comparison of two concentration of NALC-NaOH for decontamination of sputum for mycobacterial culture. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis 2009; 13(12):1572-1575.
21. Piersimoni C, Scarparo C, Callegaro A, et al. Comparison of MB/Bact alert 3D system with radiometric BACTEC system and Lowenstein-Jensen medium for recovery and identification of mycobacteria from clinical specimens: amulti center study. J Clin Microbiol, 2001; 39:651-657.
22. Kubica G P, Dye WE ,Cohn M L , Middlebrook G. Sputum digestion and decontamination with N – acetyl – L cystein-sodium hydroxide for culture of mycobacteria . Am Rev Respir Dis, 1963;89:286.
23. Kang H, Sung N, Lee S, Kim D, Jeon D, Hwang S, et al. Comparison of smear and culture positivity using NaOH method and NALC-NaOH method for sputum treatment. Tuberculosis Respirat Dis. 2008;65(5):379-84.
24. Nassau E, Parsons ER, Johnson GD. Bacteriolgical examination in tuberculosis. Tubercle (London): Tubercle; 1954. p. 35 (Colonial suppl. No. 3).
25. Pathak SK, Deshmukh PA, Menon CR. A comparison of different culture techniques. Ind J Tubercle, 1973; 20:85-87.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Unported License. that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).