Effects of different methods of decontamination for successful cultivation of Mycobacterium tuberculosis

Indian Journal of Medical Research

Volumn 138, Issue OCT, 2013, Pages 541-548

  Chatterjee, Mitali ^a   Bhattacharya, Susmita ^a   Karak, Kalpana ^a   Dastidar, Sujata G ^b  

^a MEDICAL COLLEGE AND HOSPITAL   (India)

^b Department of Microbiology   (India)

Author keywords

Acid fast bacilli; Bilayered medium; Decontamination; Mycobacterium tuberculosis; Trisodium phosphate benzalkonium

Indexed keywords

ACETYLCYSTEINE; BENZALKONIUM; SODIUM DIHYDROGEN PHOSPHATE; SODIUM HYDROXIDE; PHOSPHATE;

ARTICLE; BACTERIAL GROWTH; BACTERIUM CONTAMINATION; BACTERIUM DECONTAMINATION; BILAYERED MEDIUM; CULTURE MEDIUM; ENDOMETRIUM BIOPSY; HUMAN; KIRCHNER LIQUID MEDIUM; LOEWENSTEIN MEDIUM; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MYCOBACTERIUM TUBERCULOSIS; NONHUMAN; PUS; SPUTUM; DRUG EFFECTS; ENDOMETRIUM; FEMALE; GROWTH, DEVELOPMENT AND AGING; MICROBIOLOGY; MULTIDRUG RESISTANCE; PATHOLOGY; SUPPURATION; TUBERCULOSIS; URINE; WASTE MANAGEMENT;

BENZALKONIUM COMPOUNDS; DECONTAMINATION; DRUG RESISTANCE, MULTIPLE, BACTERIAL; ENDOMETRIUM; FEMALE; HUMANS; MYCOBACTERIUM TUBERCULOSIS; PHOSPHATES; SODIUM HYDROXIDE; SPUTUM; SUPPURATION; TUBERCULOSIS; URINE;

EID: 84887370485     PISSN: 09715916     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. World Health Organization, Global tuberculosis control. Geneva: WHO; 2012. p. 9.
2. Lawn SD, Zumla AI. Tuberculosis. Lancet 2011; 378: 57-72.
3. Steingart KR, Vivienne NG, Megan H, Hopewell PC, Ramsay A, Cunningham J, et al. Sputum processing methods to improve the sensitivity of smear microscopy for tuberculosis: A Systematic Review. Lancet Infect Dis 2006; 6: 664-674.
4. Burdz TVN, Wolfe J, Kabani A. Evaluation of sputum decontamination methods for Mycobacterium tuberculosis using viable colony counts and flow cytometry. Diag Microbiol Infect Dis 2003; 47: 503-509.
5. De Kantor IN, Laszlo A. Tuberculosis: Laboratory procedure for developing countries. In: Gangadharan PRJ, editor. Mycobacteria basic aspects, vol. 1. New York: Chapman Hall ITP; 1998. p. 351-399.
6. Tomita M, Takeno H, Yoshida S, Suzuki K, Sakatani M. Comparison of BBL Mycoprep and 2% NaOH decontamination procedures for MGIT. Kekkaku 2008; 83: 471-473.
7. Laidlaw M. Mycobacterium: tubercle bacilli. In: Collee JG, Duguid JP, Fraser AG, Marmion BP, editors. Mackie & McCartney practical medical microbiology, vol. 2. Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone; 1989. p. 399-416.
8. Buijtels PC, Petit PL. Comparison of NaOH-N-acetyl cysteine and sulfuric acid decontamination methods for recovery of mycobacteria from clinical specimens. J Microbiol Methods 2005; 62: 83-88.
9. Kumar B, Vinay S, Abbas A. In: Robbins basic pathology. United Kingdom: W.B. Saunders Company; 2007. p. 516-522.
10. Bhattacharya S, Ray R, Roy Chowdhury N, Dasgupta A, Dastidar SG. Comparison of a novel bilayered medium with the conventional media for cultivation of Mycobacterium tuberculosis. Indian J Med Res 2009; 130: 561-566.
11. Rajpal S, Dhingra VK, Aggarwal JK. Sputum grading as predictor of treatment outcome in pulmonary tuberculosis. Indian J Tuberc 2002; 49: 139-141.
12. Watt B, Rayner A, Harris G. Mycobacterium. In: Fraser AG, Marmion BP, Simmons A, editors. Mackie & McCartney's practical medical microbiology, vol. II. Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone; 1996. p. 329-341.
13. rd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2003. p. 204.
14. nd ed. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization; 1996. p. 8-11.
15. Kamerbeek J, Schouls L, Kolk A, Agterveld M Van, Soolingen D Van, Kuijper S, et al. Simultaneous detection and strain differentiation of Mycobacterium tuberculosis for diagnosis and epidemiology. J Clin Microbiol 1997; 35: 907-914.
16. Campbell I. Chi-squared and Fisher-Irwin tests of two-by-two tables with small sample recommendations. Stat Med 2007; 26: 3661-3675.
17. Nolte FS, Metchock B. Mycobacterium. In: Murray PR, Baron EJ, Tenover FC, Yolken RH, editors. Manual of clinical microbiology, Washington DC: American Society for Micobacteriology; 1995. p. 400-433.
18. Tatsioni A, Zarin DA, Aronson N, et al. Challenges in systematic reviews of diagnostic technologies. Ann Intern Med 2005; 142: 1048-1055.
19. Gebre-Selassie S. Evaluation of the concentration sputum smear technique for the laboratory diagnosis of pulmonary tuberculosis. Trop Doct 2003; 33: 160-162.
20. Angeby KA, Alvarado-Galvez C, Pineda-Garcia L, Hoffner SE. Improved sputum microscopy for a more sensitive diagnosis of pulmonary tuberculosis. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis 2000; 4: 684-687.
21. Yesilkaya H, Barer MR, Andrew PW. Antibiotic resistance may affect alkali decontamination of specimen containing mycobacteria. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis 2004; 50: 153-155.
22. Iseman MD. A clinician's guide to tuberculosis. Philadelphia: Lippincott, Williams and Wilkins; 2000. p. 29-32.
23. Vasanthkumari R. A single step culture technique for tubercle bacilli. Tubercle 1990; 71: 267-270.