4.6 Article

Assessment of burden of drug-resistant tuberculosis at a tertiary care centre in northern India: a prospective single centre cohort study

Journal

BMJ OPEN
Volume 11, Issue 4, Pages -

Publisher

BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-044096

Keywords

tuberculosis; epidemiology; microbiology; public health

Ask authors/readers for more resources

A study at a tertiary care center in northern India found that about 21.6% of patients with TB were rifampicin monoresistant, with higher resistance rates in pulmonary samples compared to extrapulmonary samples. Among 62 cases tested for second-line drugs, nearly 80% were resistant to FQs, with 11 cases being extensively drug resistant.
Objectives We aim to define the burden of rifampicin monoresistant tuberculosis (TB) at a tertiary care centre in northern India as well as determine the second-line drug susceptibilities (SL-DST) in a subset of patients. Methods A total of 3045 pulmonary (n=1883) and extrapulmonary (n=1162) samples from likely patients with TB were subjected to microscopy, culture and the Xpert MTB/RIF assay from March 2017 to June 2019. SL-DST testing by line probe assay version 2 for fluoroquinolones (FQs) and second-line injectable drugs were performed on 62 samples. Results Out of 3045 samples processed in our laboratory during the study period, 36.1% (1101/3045) were positive for Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex (MTBC) and 21.6% were rifampicin monoresistant (223/1032). The rate of rifampicin resistance in pulmonary samples was 23.5% (166/706) and in extrapulmonary cases, it was 17.4% (57/326). Out of 62 cases included for second-line testing, 48 were resistant to FQs (77.4%) while 11 were extensively drug resistant. Conclusions India urgently needs to arrest an emerging multidrug-resistant TB epidemic with associated resistance to FQs. A robust surveillance system is needed to execute the National Strategic Plan for 2017-2025.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available