0
Clinical Investigations: INFECTION |

Adequately Washed Bronchoscope Does Not Induce False-Positive Amplification Tests on Bronchial Aspirates in the Diagnosis of Pulmonary Tuberculosis*

Tae Sun Shim, MD; Hyun Sook Chi, MD; Sang Do Lee, MD; Younsuck Koh, MD; Woo Sung Kim, MD; Dong Soon Kim, MD; Won Dong Kim, MD, FCCP
Author and Funding Information

*From the Departments of Internal Medicine (Drs. Shim, Lee, Koh, W.S. Kim, D.S. Kim, and W.D. Kim) and Clinical Pathology (Dr. Chi), Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Korea.

Correspondence to: Tae Sun Shim, MD, Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, 388–1 Pungnap-dong, Songpa-gu, Seoul 138–600, Korea; e-mail: shimts@www.amc.seoul.kr



Chest. 2002;121(3):774-781. doi:10.1378/chest.121.3.774
Text Size: A A A
Published online

Study objectives: To investigate the clinical usefulness of amplification (COBAS AMPLICOR; Roche Diagnostics Systems; Branchburg, NJ) on bronchoscopic aspirate specimens in the diagnosis of pulmonary tuberculosis, with particular regard to the possibility of false-positive results in subsequent specimens due to residual Mycobacterium tuberculosis DNA.

Design and setting: A prospective clinical study at a tertiary referral medical center.

Participants and methods: Four hundred fiberoptic bronchoscopic procedures were performed, using seven bronchoscopes on 335 consecutive patients, for therapeutic or diagnostic purposes. Serial bronchial aspirates were collected and tested for M tuberculosis, using COBAS AMPLICOR (CA). Bronchoscopes were cleaned and disinfected automatically, between patient use, by the same endoscope washer. The name of each bronchoscope and the sequence of its use were recorded, together with the sequence of washing. The CA results were compared with the bacteriologic and histologic results for M tuberculosis infection. When there was a suspicion of contamination, outward polymerase chain reaction analysis was performed.

Results: Of 392 specimens (332 subjects), excluding the 8 specimens (4 subjects) in which bacteriologic and histologic analyses were omitted, a smear-positive result for acid-fast bacilli (AFB), culture-positive or biopsy-positive results, and CA-positive results were obtained in 16, 49, and 32 specimens, respectively. In AFB smear-positive subjects, the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive values (PPVs), and negative predictive values (NPVs) were 92%, 67%, 92%, and 67%, respectively. In AFB smear-negative subjects, the sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV values were 38%, 99%, 74%, and 94%, respectively. The CA test was more sensitive than the AFB smears for the diagnosis of pulmonary tuberculosis (53% vs 27%, respectively; p < 0.05). False-positive CA results were seen in only six specimens. Three of these six subjects received a diagnosis of pulmonary tuberculosis on clinical and radiologic grounds, and none of the six results seemed to be associated with bronchoscopic cross-contamination.

Conclusions: Adequately cleaned and disinfected bronchoscopes did not cause false-positive amplification test results for M tuberculosis on bronchial aspirates by cross-contamination. Furthermore, sensitivity was greater with the CA tests. Therefore, CA tests on bronchial aspirates seem to be useful in the diagnosis of pulmonary tuberculosis.

Figures in this Article

Sign In to Access Full Content

MEMBER & INDIVIDUAL SUBSCRIBER

Want Access?

NEW TO CHEST?

Become a CHEST member and receive a FREE subscription as a benefit of membership.

Individuals can purchase this article on ScienceDirect.

Individuals can purchase a subscription to the journal.

Individuals can purchase a subscription to the journal or buy individual articles.

Learn more about membership or Purchase a Full Subscription.

INSTITUTIONAL ACCESS

Institutional access is now available through ScienceDirect and can be purchased at myelsevier.com.

Sign In to Access Full Content

MEMBER & INDIVIDUAL SUBSCRIBER

Want Access?

NEW TO CHEST?

Become a CHEST member and receive a FREE subscription as a benefit of membership.

Individuals can purchase this article on ScienceDirect.

Individuals can purchase a subscription to the journal.

Individuals can purchase a subscription to the journal or buy individual articles.

Learn more about membership or Purchase a Full Subscription.

INSTITUTIONAL ACCESS

Institutional access is now available through ScienceDirect and can be purchased at myelsevier.com.

Figures

Tables

References

NOTE:
Citing articles are presented as examples only. In non-demo SCM6 implementation, integration with CrossRef’s "Cited By" API will populate this tab (http://www.crossref.org/citedby.html).

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Sign In to Access Full Content

MEMBER & INDIVIDUAL SUBSCRIBER

Want Access?

NEW TO CHEST?

Become a CHEST member and receive a FREE subscription as a benefit of membership.

Individuals can purchase this article on ScienceDirect.

Individuals can purchase a subscription to the journal.

Individuals can purchase a subscription to the journal or buy individual articles.

Learn more about membership or Purchase a Full Subscription.

INSTITUTIONAL ACCESS

Institutional access is now available through ScienceDirect and can be purchased at myelsevier.com.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging & repositioning the boxes below.

Find Similar Articles
CHEST Journal Articles
PubMed Articles
  • CHEST Journal
    Print ISSN: 0012-3692
    Online ISSN: 1931-3543