4.7 Article

Diagnostic performance of T-SPOT.TB for extrapulmonary tuberculosis according to the site of infection

Journal

JOURNAL OF INFECTION
Volume 63, Issue 5, Pages 362-369

Publisher

W B SAUNDERS CO LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jinf.2011.06.010

Keywords

Tuberculosis; Diagnosis; T-SPOT.TB

Funding

  1. Korea Research Foundation [2010-0005898]
  2. Asan Institute for Life Science [2010-462]
  3. National Research Foundation of Korea [2010-0005898] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: The clinical manifestations of extrapulmonary tuberculosis (E-TB) vary according to site of disease, so we tested the hypothesis that IFN-gamma producing T-cell responses also vary in parallel. Therefore we conducted a prospective, blinded, observational study to evaluate the diagnostic performance of blood T-SPOT. TB according to the various sites of E-TB. Methods: From April 2008 to August 2010, all patients with suspected E-TB were enrolled at a tertiary hospital in an intermediate TB-burden country. Final diagnosis in patients with suspected E-TB was classified by clinical category. Results: A total of 368 patients with suspected E-TB were enrolled; 196 (53%) were classified as having TB, including 119 (32%) with confirmed TB, 34 (9%) probable TB, and 43 (12%) possible TB; the remaining 172 (47%) were classified as not having TB. After excluding patients with possible TB, the T-SPOT.TB was more sensitive in patients with chronic forms of E-TB such as lymph node or osteoarticular TB (93%, 95% CI 83%-97%) than in patients with acute forms of E-TB such as TB meningitis or miliary TB (79%, 95% CI 66%-87%, P = 0.03). Conclusions: The diagnostic performance of the blood T-SPOT.TB differs among patients with various clinical manifestations of E-TB. (C) 2011 The British Infection Association. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available