Comparison of the Efficacies of Loop-Mediated Isothermal Amplification, Fluorescence Smear Microscopy and Culture for the Diagnosis of Tuberculosis
2011

Comparing Tests for Diagnosing Tuberculosis

Sample size: 78 publication Evidence: moderate

Author Information

Author(s): George Geojith, Mony Prem, Kenneth John

Primary Institution: St. John's Research Institute, Bangalore, India

Hypothesis

Is the LAMP assay more effective than traditional smear microscopy and culture for diagnosing tuberculosis?

Conclusion

LAMP and fluorescence smear microscopy are both effective for diagnosing tuberculosis, but LAMP performs poorly in smear-negative samples.

Supporting Evidence

  • LAMP showed a sensitivity of 79.5% and specificity of 93.8% compared to culture.
  • Smear microscopy had a sensitivity of 82.1% and specificity of 96.9% compared to culture.
  • LAMP and smear in series had a specificity of 100.0%.

Takeaway

This study looked at different tests to find out if a new test called LAMP is good at finding tuberculosis. It found that LAMP works well for some samples but not for others.

Methodology

The study compared the LAMP assay with smear microscopy and culture using 78 sputum samples from TB suspects.

Potential Biases

Potential contamination of cultures and the presence of non-tuberculous mycobacteria could affect results.

Limitations

The sample size for certain subtypes was limited, and the HIV status of participants was not determined.

Participant Demographics

Participants were TB suspects from the Palamaner region in Andhra Pradesh, India.

Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

10.1371/journal.pone.0021007

Want to read the original?

Access the complete publication on the publisher's website

View Original Publication