4.2 Article

Pathology of postprimary tuberculosis in humans and mice: Contradiction of long-held beliefs

Journal

TUBERCULOSIS
Volume 87, Issue 4, Pages 267-278

Publisher

CHURCHILL LIVINGSTONE
DOI: 10.1016/j.tube.2006.11.003

Keywords

postprimary; secondary; tuberculosis; lung; pathology; mouse; human

Funding

  1. NHLBI NIH HHS [HL068537] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Tuberculosis remains one of the world's leading infectious causes of death. Approximately 80% of all disease is due to postprimary (secondary) tuberculosis in the lung. Unfortunately, tissues of developing lesions are seldom available and there are no recognized models of postprimary tuberculosis. In the preantibiotic era when tissues were more abundant, several investigators described early postprimary tuberculosis as a lipid pneumonia quite different from the caseating granulomas commonly described today. We used histopathologic, immunohistochemical and acid fast stains to examine tissues from several people with untreated primary and postprimary tuberculosis and compared the findings with those of mice with reactivation tuberculosis. The results confirmed that developing postprimary tuberculosis begins as a lipid pneumonia accompanied by bronchial obstruction in which infection is restricted to foamy alveolar macrophages. Cavities result from a combination of caseation of tuberculous pneumonia and microvascular occlusion characteristic of delayed type hypersensitivity (DTH). Reactivation tuberculosis in the mouse begins as a similar tuberculous lipid pneumonia with bronchial obstruction and evidence for participation of DTH. Developing necrosis in both species is associated with localization of organisms within lipid droplets. These results suggest that reactivation tuberculosis in mice is a valuable model of developing human postprimary tuberculosis. (c) 2006 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

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available