• Users Online: 173
  • Home
  • Print this page
  • Email this page


 
 Table of Contents  
FULL LENGTH ARTICLE
Year : 2016  |  Volume : 5  |  Issue : 4  |  Page : 437-445

Evaluation of different laboratory methods for rapid diagnosis of tuberculous pleurisy*


1 Medical Microbiology and Immunology Department, Faculty of Medicine Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt
2 Chest Disease Department, Faculty of Medicine Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt

Date of Web Publication14-Feb-2017

Correspondence Address:
Hadir Okasha
Medical Microbiology and Immunology Department, Faculty of Medicine, Alexandria University, El Khartoum Square, Azarita
Egypt
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.1016/j.ijmyco.2016.07.001

Rights and Permissions
  Abstract 


Background/Objective: Tuberculous pleurisy is a diagnostic challenge due to its nonspecific clinical presentation, paucibacillary nature of the effusion together with the inefficiency of conventional laboratory methods motivating the evaluation of variable diagnostic strategies.
Methods: Using thoracoscopy, the pleural cavity of 50 patients with undiagnosed exudative pleural effusion were fully examined and biopsy specimens of affected parietal pleura were taken under direct vision. Pleural fluid and biopsy specimen were subjected to microscopic examination (direct and after cytocentrifugation), culture, PCR, and histopathological examination.
Results: The pleural biopsy specimens proved to have a higher detection rate of tubercle bacilli than pleural fluid. Also, cytocentrifugation improved the sensitivity of microscopic detection for both pleural fluid and biopsy specimens.
Conclusion: The combination of microbiological results and histopathology examination of the pleural biopsy specimens is essential for the diagnosis of tuberculous pleurisy, as microbiological examination of pleural biopsy specimens has proved to have a higher detection rate than pleural fluid examination.

Keywords: Biopsy, Mycobacterium, Pleural tuberculosis, Thoracoscopy, Tuberculosis, Nonspecific pleurisy


How to cite this article:
Amer S, El Hefnawy A, Wahab NA, Okasha H, Baz A. Evaluation of different laboratory methods for rapid diagnosis of tuberculous pleurisy*. Int J Mycobacteriol 2016;5:437-45

How to cite this URL:
Amer S, El Hefnawy A, Wahab NA, Okasha H, Baz A. Evaluation of different laboratory methods for rapid diagnosis of tuberculous pleurisy*. Int J Mycobacteriol [serial online] 2016 [cited 2019 Nov 20];5:437-45. Available from: http://www.ijmyco.org/text.asp?2016/5/4/437/200127




  Introduction Top


According to the World Health Organization, the incidence of tuberculosis (TB) was 9.6 million in 2014 and it is estimated that deaths from TB will increase from 3 million a year to 5 million by the year 2050. Between 2002 and 2020, approximately 1 billion people will be newly infected, 200 million people will get sick, and 36 million will die of TB if proper control measures are not instituted [1],[2].

Although the majority of patients with TB have pulmonary TB, extrapulmonary TB affecting mainly the lymph nodes and pleura constitutes the initial presentation in ˜25% of adults [3]. It was mentioned that among all cases presenting with pleural effusion, 25% are unable to be attributed to a specific diagnosis, even after thoracentesis and closed pleural biopsy (PB) [4]. As many as 50% of the patients in this undiagnosed group will eventually be diagnosed with a malignancy. Other diagnostic possibilities include TB, fungal disease, connective tissue disease-related pleuritis, pulmonary infarction, rib fractures, asbestos-related pleural effusion, and nonspecific pleuritis (NSP) [5].

Still, TB is the main cause of pleural effusions in some countries [6]. It is important to consider the possibility of tuberculous pleurisy in all patients with an undiagnosed pleural effusion. A pleural effusion as an isolated manifestation of TB is self-limited and of little immediate concern, but may lead to serious disease many years later. Tuberculous pleurisy is thought to represent primarily a hypersensitivity reaction to tuberculous protein while the bacillary burden in the pleural space is low [7].

Extrapulmonary tuberculosis usually presents more of a diagnostic problem than pulmonary TB. The combination of small numbers of bacilli and inaccessible sites causes bacteriologic confirmation of diagnosis to be more difficult, and invasive procedures are frequently required to establish a diagnosis [8].

The aim of the current study was to evaluate the different diagnostic methods: (1) direct smears; (2) cytocentrifugation prepared smears; (3) cultures; and (4) polymerase chain reaction (PCR) for detection of Mycobacterium tuberculosis in pleural fluid (PF) and PB specimen obtained by thoracoscopy from patients with undiagnosed lymphocytic exudative pleural effusion.


  Patients and methods Top


The present study was conducted on 50 patients who presented to the Chest Diseases Department in Alexandria Main University Hospital, Alexandria, Egypt, with exudative pleural effusion (according to Light's criteria), but of unclear etiology after biochemical, bacteriological, and cytological examination of the PF. All patients were subjected to full history taking including age, sex, smoking status, occupation, residence, and history of other diseases or previous malignancies, thorough clinical examination and routine laboratory investigations including hemoglobin, total and differential white blood cell count, renal and liver function tests, fasting blood glucose level, coagulation profile including prothrombin time and activity, international normalized ratio, and platelet count. Oxygen saturation was detected with a pulse oximeter and an electrocardiogram was performed on all patients. Radiological evaluation in form of a plain chest X-ray in the posteroanterior view to evaluate the amount of pleural effusion, position of mediastinum, and any other abnormality, and contrast enhanced computed tomography to view pleural thickening, pleural nodules, mediastinal pleural involvement, lung masses or consolidation, lymphadenopathy, and any other abnormality was performed on all patients. Also, thoracic ultra sound (Sonos 100 CF, Hewlett Packard, MS, USA) was done to assess loculations, adhesions, and apparent masses, and to determine the most appropriate site of entry. Thoracentesis was performed and PF analysis for total protein and albumin content, lactate dehydrogenase content, total and differential leucocytic count, Ziehl–Neelsen (ZN) stain for acid-fast bacilli (AFB), and cytological examination for malignant cells were performed.

Thoracoscopy was performed in the bronchoscopy suite, with the patient under conscious sedation and local anesthesia lying in the lateral decubitus position. An examination was carried out with a rigid thoracoscope. Patients were monitored regarding blood pressure and pulse rate, an electrocardiograph was attached, a pulse oximeter was used, and supplementary oxygen was provided to maintain oxygen saturation > 90%. Equipment used included a rigid thoracoscope (Karl Storz, Tuttlingen, Germany), a straight forward telescope 0 ° with an angled eyepiece, 10 mm in diameter, working length at 27 cm with a 6-mm working channel, a metallic trocar 11 mm in diameter, cold (xenon) light source, an endoscopic camera attached to the eyepiece, video monitor and recorder, and other accessories commonly available in a chest tube insertion tray. A single port of entry was required in all patients. The patient was positioned in the lateral decubitus position breathing spontaneously, with the normal lung in the dependent position and with the arm raised above the head. The involved side of the chest was disinfected: 15–30 mL of lidocaine 2% was injected at the point of entry, through all layers of chest wall as far as the pleura. Thoracentesis to confirm the presence of PF at the insertion site was performed. A single puncture, which involved a 1-cm incision in the midaxillary line between the fourth and seventh intercostal space of the chest wall was done, and a track was created by blunt dissection. A trocar was inserted and the pleural cavity was opened to atmospheric pressure. Any remaining PF was then aspirated [9]. A full examination of the pleural cavity was then made and biopsy specimens of parietal pleura were taken as appropriate under direct vision. Multiple (5–7) biopsy samples were taken. At the end of the procedure, a chest tube was inserted and lung expansion was radiographically confirmed before removal of the tube. A chest radiograph was taken within 24 h and patients were put under close observation postthoracoscopy. Both PF samples and PBs were sent to the TB lab in the Department of Medical Microbiology and Immunology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Alexandria, as well as undergoing pathological examination. The specimen sent for microbiology was put separately in normal saline. The study was approved by the Alexandria Faculty of Medicine Ethical Committee and informed consent was obtained from patients before sampling.

Specimen processing

Specimens were delivered aseptically to the TB lab in the Department of Medical Microbiology and Immunology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Alexandria.

With regards to the PF samples, they were divided into three parts: (1) one part (20 mL) was centrifuged at 1200×g for 15 min and the sediment was used for ZN smear and Lowenstein–Jensen (LJ) culture [10]; (2) another part (10 mL) of the sample was centrifuged at 1200×g for 15 min and the deposit was used to detect AFB after cytocentrifugation in cytospin [11]; (3) the last 10 mL of the samples were used for the detection of mycobacterial DNA by PCR [12].

The PB obtained by medical thoracoscopy was delivered in part in sterile normal saline, minced finely, and homogenized by shaking with 1-mm sterile glass beads, suspended in 4-mL sterile distilled water by vortex shaker, then the sample was divided to be used to perform a direct ZN smear, cytocentrifugation ZN smear, LJ culture, and PCR for mycobacterial DNA [10]. A portion of the punch PB was also sent for histopathological examination.

Microscopy

Two types of smears were done from each processed PF and PB: (1) a direct smear from the centrifuged deposit was stained by ZN and examined microscopically for AFB [10]; (2) a cytocentrifugation smear was done for PF and PB by centrifugation at 1200×g for 15 min, then the deposit was decontaminated by mixing with an equal volume of 6% Na hypochlorite and was used to prepare a ZN stained smear after cytocentrifugation in cytospin (rottofix32A, Hettich, Kirchlengern, Germany) and examined microscopically for AFB.

Culture

The processed PF and PB specimens were decontaminated and homogenized according to Petroff's method. The sediment was then inoculated onto two slants of LJ medium. One tube was plain LJ and another tube containing p-Nitrobenzoic acid (500 mg/L) for the detection of atypical mycobacterium. Both slants were incubated at 37 °C and were examined using a hand lens 5–7 days after incubation and weekly thereafter for 6–8 weeks. Suspected mycobacterial colonies required > 7 days to grow and were further identified as M. Tuberculosis on the basis of colonial morphology on LJ medium, acid alcohol fast staining, preference of growth at 35–37 °C, lack of photo reactivity, and inability to grow on LJ medium containing p-Nitrobenzoic acid (500 mg/L) [10],[13].

PCR

DNA extraction from PF and PB samples was done using QIAGENQIA amp DNA Mini and Blood Mini extraction kit (Qiagen Inc., Valencia, CA, USA) according to manufacturer instructions. The amplification of the extracted DNA was then carried out using the following primers: forward primer (P1), 5'-CCT GCG AGC GTA GGC GTC GG3' and reverse primer (P2), 5' CTC GTC CAG CGC CGC TTC GG3', to amplify a target fragment of 123 bp from the insertion of the M. Tuberculosis sequence element IS6110 [14]. Each amplification reaction was carried out in a final volume of 25 μL containing 12 μL of maxima hot start PCR master mix (2×), 2- μL P1, 2- μL P2, 5- μL DNA extract from PF, or 7- μL DNA extract from PB. The volume was adjusted to 25 μL using sterile distilled water. The PCR amplification was done in a thermal cycler (Genius Techne, Cambridge, England) and was subjected to 40 cycles of denaturation at 94 °C for 2 min, annealing at 68 °C for 2 min, and extension at 72 °C for 1 min. The amplified products were separated on 2% agarose gel electrophoresis in 1×40 mM Tris–acetate plus 1 mM EDTA). Separated DNA segments of 123 bp were stained with ethidium bromide and visualized on a UV-light transilluminator ([Figure 1]).
Figure 1: Polymerase chain reaction-based detection of the Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex targeting IS6110. Electrophoresis separation of the amplicon into 2% agarose gel is documented across Lanes 1–8. The presence of a 123-bp amplicon in Lanes 1 and 3–5 indicated the presence of the target while the absence of the amplicon in Lane 2 pointed towards the absence of the target. Note. L = ladder 100 bp; NC = negative control; PC = positive control.

Click here to view


Statistical analysis

Statistical analysis was carried out using SPSS statistics software (version 20.0; IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA). Categorical variables were described using frequencies and percentages. Chi-square, Fisher's exact, and Monte Carlo tests were used for testing the associations between categorical variables. Quantitative data were tested for normality using Kolmogorov–Smirnov test. Normally distributed variables were described using mean and standard deviation and in such cases the independent sample t test was used for comparing two groups. Agreement test, reported as a kappa statistic, was used as a quantitative measure of the strength of agreement between tests. It lies on a −1 to 1 scale where 1 is perfect agreement and 0 is expected to be due to chance. A p value of kappa was also reported. Statistical significance was accepted as p < .05. All applied statistical tests of significance were two-tailed.

LJ culture was considered the gold standard for each processed specimen when dealing with the other tests performed (microscopy and PCR) on same sample, to calculate sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value results for these tests.


  Results Top


Of the 50 patients included in the study 24 (48%) were men and 26 (52%) were women with a mean age of 53.08±11.9 years for both sex and their age ranged from 27 years to 80 years.

Using the PB culture results, 24 (48%) patients were found to be tuberculous and their mean age was significantly lower (47.71±12.28 years) than the 26 (52%) patients with a negative PB culture (58.04±9.21 years; p = .001). With regards to sex distribution, a significant difference was found between both sexes regarding LJ positive cultures, with a female: male ratio of 2:1 (χ2 = 3.978, p = .046).

Among the studied patients, 16 patients (32%) were current or ex-smokers and 32 patients (64%) were passive smokers. Regarding previous medical history, 19 patients (38%) were known to be diabetics, and 10 patients (20%) had a history of previous malignancy. The main presenting symptoms were dyspnea (90%), chest pain (58%), significant weight loss (40%), fever (34%), cough (20%), night sweating (4%), and hemoptysis (2%) ([Table 1]).
Table 1: Demographic characteristics and baseline clinical and radiological data of the studied patients.

Click here to view


The right side was involved in 28 (56%) patients and the left side in 21 (42%), while bilateral effusion was found in only one patient, with no significant difference found regarding the side of pleural involvement (MCp = .694). The amount of effusion was massive in 21 patients (42%), moderate in 27 (54%), and mild in two (4%) patients. Contrast enhanced computed tomography of the studied patients showed smooth pleural thickening in 22 patients (10 were diagnosed as tuberculous, 10 malignant, one empyema, and one idiopathic effusion) and irregular pleural thickening was present in 10 patients. All were finally diagnosed as malignant effusion. Pleural nodules were found in 11 patients and mediastinal pleura were involved in six patients (all diagnosed as malignant).

Thoracoscopic findings

Thoracoscopic examination of the pleura revealed pleural nodules, hyperemia and increased vascularity, adhesions, masses, fibrinous pleural peel, pleural plaques, and micronodules ([Table 2] and [Figure 2]).
Table 2: Thoracoscopic findings (macroscopic appearance) among the studied patients.

Click here to view
Figure 2: Radiology and thoracoscopic view of a tuberculous pleurisy patient. (A) Chest X-ray showing right-sided pleural effusion; (B) chest computed tomography showing right encysted pleural effusion with pleural thickening (maximally reaching 7 mm); (C) thoracoscopic view showing micronodules; (D) Disruption of adhesions using rigid forceps. Histopathological findings showed nonspecific pleurisy with foreign body giant cells and direct smear staining of pleural biopsy for acid-fast bacilli showed positive results. Patient was diagnosed as tuberculous pleurisy.

Click here to view


Results of different microbiological methods for diagnosis of tropical pulmonary eosinophilia from both PF and PB specimens

Out of 50 PF specimens, two (4%) were positive by direct ZN smear, seven (14%) by cytocentrifugation ZN smear, 16 (32%) by LJ culture, and 17 (34%) by PCR. Out of the 50PB specimens, three (6%) showed positive results by direct ZN smear, 12 (24%) by cytocentrifugation ZN smear, 24 (48%) by LJ culture, and 26 (52%) by PCR ([Table 3]).
Table 3: Results of different microbiological methods for diagnosis of tropical pulmonary eosinophilia.

Click here to view


Using LJ culture as the gold standard, PCR had the highest sensitivity in detecting Tuberculous Pleural Effusion (TPE) from PF and PB specimens, 93.75% and 100%, respectively, followed by cytocentrifugation ZN smear (37.50% and 50%), then direct smear with a sensitivity of 12.50% for both specimens. Regarding specificity, direct ZN smear showed the highest specificity (100%) for both specimens, followed by cytocentrifugation ZN smear (97.06% and 100%), then PCR (94.12% and 92.31%; [Table 4]) ([Table S1],[Table S2],[Table S3],[Table S4],[Table S5],[Table S6]).
Table 4: Evaluation of direct smear, cytocentrifugation Ziehl–Neelsen (ZN) smear, and polymerase chain reaction (PCR) for the diagnosis of tuberculosis in pleural fluid (PF).

Click here to view


When comparing LJ culture results (gold standard) for PF and PB, [Table 5] shows that 24 (48%) had positive PB culture results and 16 (32%) had positive PF culture results. This difference was statistically significant (McNemar p = .021). Out of the 24 (48%) with positive PB culture results, 15 (30%) were also positive by PF culture and nine (18%) were negative. Out of 16 (32%) PF specimens with positive culture results, 15 (30%) were positive by PB culture and only one (2%) was negative. The kappa value was 0.594, which reflects the moderate agreement of LJ culture of PF with LJ culture of PB for the detection of AFB.
Table 5: Comparison between Lowenstein–Jensen (LJ) culture results for pleural fluid (PF) and pleural biopsy (PB) specimens.

Click here to view


We also compared PCR results for PF and PB, where 26 (52%) had positive PB PCR results and 17 (34%) had positive PCR results from PF specimens. This difference was statistically significant. (McNemar p = .004). Out of the 26 (52%) PB specimens with positive PCR, 17 (34%) were also positive by PF and nine (18%) were negative, indicating that if PCR was used on PF only nine cases would have been missed. All the 17 (34%) PCR positive PF specimens were also positive by PB PCR. The kappa value was .645, which reflects good agreement of PCR results for PF with the PCR results for PB for detection of AFB ([Table 6]).
Table 6: Results of pleural fluid (PF) and pleural biopsy (PB) polymerase chain reaction (PCR).

Click here to view


Histopathological findings

Twenty-four (48%) of the 50 studied patients were diagnosed as malignant effusion (4 mesothelioma and 20 metastatic pleural carcinomas) and 22/50 patients (44%) were diagnosed as nonspecific fibrinous pleurisy. Three patients (6%) showed caseating granulomas and one out of 50 patients (2%) showed septic pleurisy. Of the 24 patients with positive biopsy LJ culture results, three showed caseating granuloma, two showed malignancy, 18 showed NSP, and one showed septic pleurisy diagnosed as tuberculous empyema. All of the LJ culture positive biopsy specimens that showed NSP on histopathological examination were positive by PCR. Both TB and malignancy coexisted in two patients. Histopathological examination failed to significantly discriminate between positive and negative patients compared with PB LJ culture (MCp = .197) ([Table 7]).
Table 7: Results of histopathological examination in comparison to Lowenstein–Jensen (LJ) culture for pleural biopsy (PB).

Click here to view



  Discussion Top


In the present study we evaluated different laboratory diagnostic tests on PF and PB specimens taken from patients with undiagnosed exudative pleural effusion. Thoracoscopy was performed under local anesthesia to obtain PB as it allowed direct visualization of the pleura to determine the macroscopic lesions in addition to the feasibility of obtaining biopsy for both bacteriological and pathological examinations. Sugiyama et al. classified tuberculous pleurisy into four stages: Stage I where the parietal pleura is swollen, reddened, and show tiny white nodules; Stage II where the redness and swelling become more extensive and military white nodules extending diffusely and coalescing together; Stage III white fibrin deposits extend over the pleura in a cord or a membrane-like fashion; and Stage IV (the chronic stage) the fibrin deposits become fibrous. Part of the pleural effusion becomes encapsulated with a fibrin net, and the parietal pleura become white, thickened, firm, and difficult to biopsy. This thickened, firm pleura cannot be biopsied except under direct vision as in cases of rigid thoracoscopy in order to avoid injury to the visceral pleura and lung [15],[16].

The mean age of TPE-proven cases in the current study was 47.71±12.28 years, with a female:male ratio of 2:1. Studies showed that women may have a higher rate of disease progression in their reproductive years, whereas men have higher rates at older ages which means that hormonal factors might be involved [17]. Also, in a study conducted among African-born cases, women were at higher risk of extrapulmonary TB, those of the 25–59 years group were the most likely to present as extrapulmonary TB, with women at higher risk being in North Africa [18].

Our results revealed that ZN smear had the lowest detection rate for both PF and PB specimens followed by cytocentrifugation ZN smear, then LJ culture, and PCR. This was in agreement with other researchers evaluating microscopy and cultures on similar samples [19],[20]. Of importance in our study, ZN smear from PF had a sensitivity of 12.50%, which increased to 37.50% when applying cytocentrifugation prior to ZN staining. Specificity was 100% for direct ZN smear and 97.06% for cytocentrifugation ZN smear. This specificity result can be explained by the presence of one case in this study that showed positive cytocentrifugation ZN smear result with negative culture which was attributed to the presence of nonviable mycobacteria detected also by PCR. This patient has been on antituberculous therapy due to high clinical suspicion. The explanation of the low sensitivity value of ZN smears in the present study is due to the low bacillary load in PF, as the detection by microscopy depends on the presence of more than 104–5 bacilli/mL for microscopic positivity [21],[22],[23],[24]. However the use of cytocentrifugation method for preparing ZN increases sensitivity without a loss of specificity, compared to the direct smear method [25].

Regarding PB specimens ZN had a sensitivity of 12.5% which increased to 50% for ZN smear after cytocentrifugation, while specificity was 100% for both smears. Others examined pleural tissue for AFB by direct ZN, revealing variable rates of detection by smear. This difference may be explained by using different methods for collecting, processing, and homogenization of PB specimens. To our knowledge no studies were previously done for evaluation of ZN cytocentrifugation smears on PB after homogenization [19],[26],[27],[28],[29].

The specificity of both direct and cytocentrifugation smear from PB was (100%) as processing and concentrating methods do not yield any gain in specificity in comparison to direct smear, yet the difference was reflected on the increased sensitivity of cytocentrifugation ZN smears over direct ZN smear in both PF and PB specimens [30]. Revealing that cytocentrifugation smear has many advantages including: (1) rapid results; (2) increasing sensitivity of detection when small numbers of bacilli are present; (3) safety, because the bleached specimen has no viable organisms; and (4) cost-effectiveness and simplicity, enabling laboratories of all sizes to perform accurate AFB smears around the clock. The only limitation of this method is the inability to produce viable mycobacterial cultures from the bleached cytocentrifuged specimens [31].

The lower culture detection rate in PF samples when compared with that of PB samples can be explained by the presence of viable bacilli in the involved pleural tissue, while the pleural effusion is considered a manifestation of a hypersensitivity reaction to the mycobacterium [32].

Regarding IS6110 PCR performed on both PF and PB specimen, the higher sensitivity of PB specimens compared with PF specimens is explained by the fact that a biopsy specimen allows for a better quality of sample with sufficient amount of tissue containing mycobacterial DNA, and thus increases the sensitivity of the PCR. Also medical thoracoscopy allows for the direct inspection of the pleura, thus biopsies can be taken under direct vision, giving a diagnostic yield superior to that of blind closed PB. However, the relatively lower specificity of PCR in comparison with culture in this study is a reflection of two PF specimens with positive PCR and negative culture results. The first specimen showed positive cytocentrifugation ZN smear result with negative culture due to presence of nonviable mycobacteria which was detected also by PCR. This patient had been on antituberculous therapy for the previous 6 weeks. The second specimen had false positive PCR results which might be due to the presence of nonviable mycobacteria or cross contamination that could have occurred during specimen collection or processing or from latent infection with TB.

In similar studies which used thoracoscopy to improve diagnosis of patients with undiagnosed pleural effusion by thoracocentesis and closed PB, Helala et al. and Huang et al. [34] found that the most common diagnosis was malignancy which highlights the importance of thoracoscopy versus other methods of sampling the pleura. This is in contrast to others who reported that histopathologic examinations of the PB specimens showed prevalence of caseating granuloma in patients with exudative pleural effusion [19],[29],[35].

In the current study the most common thoracoscopic finding was the presence of adhesions, loculations, fibrinous pleural peel, and nodules (sometimes also small micronodules). There was widespread affection of the pleura explaining the high yield of closed transthoracic PB in tuberculous patients. The sensitivity of thoracoscopic macroscopic appearance suggestive of tuberculous pleural involvement was 66.67% and the specificity was 92.31%; the positive predictive value and negative predictive value were 88.89% and 75% ([Table S7]), respectively. The macroscopic appearance at thoracoscopy proved reliable.

In the current study the most common pathological findings for PB specimens with positive LJ culture and PCR was Nonspecific pleurisy NSP. A study conducted by Amini et al. [36] in Iran, assessed the value of PCR IS6110 assay in tissue specimens of needle PB in patients suspicious of pleural TB, showed that out of 68 total patients, 15 positive PCR results belonged to patients with nonspecific biopsy reports, and out of 12 malignant patients only one had positive PCR for TB. Also Yum and Choi [37] reported three (25%) of 12 cases diagnosed as chronic or NSP were positive in PCR for M. Tuberculosis. Those 12 patients were diagnosed as TB clinically with therapeutic trial with antituberculous drugs and clinical follow up. Kim et al. [38] reported that out of 23 patients with NSP (that were followed up until a diagnosis was reached), 11 (48%) were found to have tuberculosis based on their response to therapy and neoplasms were detected in two (8.7%). In another study conducted by Oshita et al. [39] on 69 cases of NSP diagnosed with pleura core needle biopsy and then followed up for > 2 years, where a final diagnosis was established in 56 cases, the causes of the effusion were tuberculous in 29 cases and neoplastic in 13 cases (27 out of 29 cases [90%] with tuberculous pleuritis were therapeutically diagnosed).

The two PBs showing coexisting TB with malignancy is a finding supported by several studies as patients with malignancy have reduced immunocompetence due to their primary disease and/or the effects of anticancer treatment which predispose to TB [40],[41],[42]. Also, with the progression of lung cancer, old foci of TB would reactivate and dissemination of TB bacilli could occur [43].

Chawla et al. [44] compared PCR results with histopathological findings and stated that positive PCR/negative histopathological examination results for TB was due to disease still developing and well-developed granuloma had not yet formed, but the presence of mycobacterial DNA in tissues could still be easily detected by PCR at the early stage.

Similar results were found in another study where TB PCR results were also positive in 10 (36%) of 28 cases with chronic inflammation without definite granulomatous lesions. This result was explained by immunosuppression or the small size of biopsy specimens. In immunosuppressed patients, such as patients infected with the human immunodeficiency virus, the tissue reaction to TB includes a spectrum of changes that may not involve the presence of a granuloma, despite the presence of TB pleuritis. In addition, because the size of submitted histologic specimens is usually small, fully developed histopathologic features of TB, such as a well-formed granuloma with caseous necrosis, were infrequently seen [27].

In the current study histopathological examination showed that out of the 24 patients with positive biopsy LJ culture results, only three (12.5%) showed caseating granulomas which emphasize the value of LJ culture for the diagnosis of TB from PB specimens.

Hasaneen et al. [29] reported that histopathologic examination of the PB specimen had a sensitivity of 53.8% and was a rapid method for reaching the diagnosis of tuberculous pleural effusion; however, its sensitivity was low in comparison to that of PB culture (92.3%). These results were in agreement with the results reported by Katiyar et al. [45] showing that the culture of PB was more sensitive in diagnosing tuberculous pleural effusion when compared to the pathologic examination of PB specimens. Also, Sugiyama et al. [15] reported that the diagnostic rate of thoracoscopic PB was 90.1%.

The difference in detection rates in the histopathologic examinations in these studies could be attributed to the fact that repeated sampling is needed for histopathologic examinations to detect caseating lesions, while for cultures one sample seems to be sufficient. In addition to the need for multiple sampling, histopathology alone cannot distinguish between a disease caused by M. Tuberculosis from other causes of granuloma [46]. Rosso et al. [47] found that the best sensitivity was achieved by combining the results of pleura tissue culture and histopathology 91.8%.

As a conclusion microbiological examination of PB specimens has proved to have a higher detection rate than PF examination which failed to diagnose eight tuberculous pleurisy patients out of the 24 patients diagnosed by PB LJ culture. Cytocentrifugation prepared ZN smear proved to be safe, cheap, applicable, and easy to be used as an effective screening method that can be efficiently applied to pleural punch biopsy samples. PCR provides a rapid diagnostic test for TPE but false positivity was a limitation, therefore the molecular methods cannot substitute culture (gold standard) but may successfully complement them. Also, a combination of the results from microbiological and histopathology examinations of the PB specimens is recommended and considering NSP histopathology reports from pleural punch biopsies in TPE clinically suspected cases as an alert to improve the clinical vision for early diagnosis and treatment of TPE.


  Conflicts of interest Top


The authors declare no conflict of interest.


  Appendix A. Supplementary data Top


Supplementary data associated with this article can be found, in the online version, at http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmyco. 2016.07.001.



 
  References Top

1.
World Health Organization, Fact sheet No104. <http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs104/en/>, 2016 (Accessed 5 April 2016).  Back to cited text no. 1
    
2.
B. Mathema, N.E. Kurepina, P. Jbifani, et al, Molecular epidemiology of tuberculosis: current insights, Clin. Microbiol. Rev. 19 (2006) 658–685.  Back to cited text no. 2
    
3.
J.M. Porcel, Tuberculous pleural effusion, Lung 187 (2009) 263–270.  Back to cited text no. 3
    
4.
C.J. Ryan, R.F. Rodgers, K.K. Unni, et al, The outcome of patients with pleural effusion of indeterminate cause at thoracotomy, Mayo Clin. Proc. 56 (1981) 145–149.  Back to cited text no. 4
    
5.
C. Boutin, J.R. Viallat, P. Cargnino, et al, Thoracoscopy in malignant pleural effusions, Am. Rev. Respir. Dis. 124 (1981) 588–592.  Back to cited text no. 5
    
6.
R.W. Light, Pleural Diseases, fifth ed., Lippincott Williams, and Wilkins, Baltimore, MD, 2007.  Back to cited text no. 6
    
7.
R.W. Light, Update on tuberculous pleural effusion, Respirology 14 (2010) 451–458.  Back to cited text no. 7
    
8.
The American Thoracic Society, Diagnostic standards and classification of tuberculosis in adults and children, Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med. 161 (2000) 1376–1395.  Back to cited text no. 8
    
9.
A. Agarwal, R. Prasad, R. Garg, et al, Medical thoracoscopy: a useful diagnostic tool for undiagnosed pleural effusion, Indian J. Chest Dis. Allied Sci. 56 (2014) 217–220.  Back to cited text no. 9
    
10.
K. Chapin, Clinical microscopy, in: P.R. Murray, E.J. Baron, M. A. Pfaller, F.C. Tenover, R.H. Yolken (Eds.), Manual of Clinical Microbiology, sixth ed., American Society for Microbiology, Washington D.C, 1995, pp. 33–51.  Back to cited text no. 10
    
11.
E.M. Peterson, A. Nakasone, J.M. Platon-DeLeon, et al, Comparison of direct and concentrated acid-fast smears to identify specimens culture positive for Mycobacterium spp, J. Clin. Microbiol. 37 (1999) 3564–3568.  Back to cited text no. 11
    
12.
D. De Wit, G. Maartens, L. Steyn, A comparative study of the polymerase chain reaction and conventional procedures for the diagnosis of tuberculous pleural effusion, Tuber. Lung Dis. 73 (1992) 262–267.  Back to cited text no. 12
    
13.
A.L. Vestal, Procedures of isolation and identification of mycobacteria, U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare publication no. (CDC) 77–8230, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, 1977.  Back to cited text no. 13
    
14.
K.D. Eisenach, M.D. Cave, J.H. Bates, et al, Polymerase chain reaction amplification of a repetitive DNA sequence specific for Mycobacterium tuberculosis, J. Infect. Dis. 161 (1990) 977–981.  Back to cited text no. 14
    
15.
M. Sugiyama, S. Tachikawa, T. Horiguchi, Thoracoscopy in tuberculous pleurisy, J. Jpn. Soc. Bronchol. 23 (2001) 336–340.  Back to cited text no. 15
    
16.
M. Sakuraba, K. Masuda, A. Hebisawa, et al, Thoracoscopic pleural biopsy for tuberculous pleurisy under local anesthesia, Ann. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg. 12 (2006) 245–248.  Back to cited text no. 16
    
17.
C.B. Holmes, H. Hausler, P. Nunn, A review of sex differences in the epidemiology of tuberculosis, Int. J. Tuberc. Lung Dis. 2! (1998) 96–104.  Back to cited text no. 17
    
18.
J. Cailhol, B.N.D. Decludt, D. Che, Sociodemographic factors that contribute to the development of extrapulmonary tuberculosis were identified, J. Clin. Epidemiol. 58 (2005) 1066–1071.  Back to cited text no. 18
    
19.
S.A. Sahn, J.T. Huggins, M.E. San José , et al, Can tuberculous pleural effusions be diagnosed by pleural fluid analysis alone?, Int J. Tuberc. Lung Dis. 17 (2013) 787–793.  Back to cited text no. 19
    
20.
L. Valdé s, M.S. Jose, A. Pose, et al, Diagnosing tuberculous pleural effusion using clinical data and pleural fluid analysis. A study of patients less than 40 years-old in an area with a high incidence of tuberculosis, Respir. Med. 104 (2010) 1211–1217.  Back to cited text no. 20
    
21.
Y.C. Lai, S.C. Chang, M.K. Yuan, et al, Tuberculous pleural effusion in elderly, Int. J. Gerontol. 6 (2012) 224–228.  Back to cited text no. 21
    
22.
D. Bandyopadhyay, S. Gupta, S. Banerjee, et al, Adenosine deaminase estimation and multiplex polymerase chain reaction in diagnosis of extra-pulmonary tuberculosis, Int. J. Tuberc. Lung Dis. 12 (2008) 1203–1208.  Back to cited text no. 22
    
23.
M.K. Gill, S. Kukreja, N. Chhabra, Evaluation of nested PCR for rapid diagnosis of clinically suspected tuberculous pleurisy, J. Clin. Diagn. Res. 17 (2013) 2456–2458.  Back to cited text no. 23
    
24.
A. Maurya, S. Kant, R. Kushwaha, et al, The advantage of using IS6110-PCR vs. BACTEC culture for rapid detection of Mycobacterium tuberculosis from pleural fluid in northern India, BioSci. Trends 5 (2011) 159–164.  Back to cited text no. 24
    
25.
M.K.M. Uddin, M.R. Chowdhury, S. Ahmed, et al, Comparison of direct versus concentrated smear microscopy in detection of pulmonary tuberculosis, BMC Res. Notes 6 (2013) 291.  Back to cited text no. 25
    
26.
S. Pandit, A.D. Chaudhuri, S.B. Datta, et al, Role of pleural biopsy in etiological diagnosis of pleural effusion, Lung India 27 (2010) 202–204.  Back to cited text no. 26
    
27.
D.Y. Park, J.Y. Kim, K.U. Choi, et al, Comparison of polymerase chain reaction with histopathologic features for diagnosis of tuberculosis in formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded histologic specimens, Arch. Pathol. Lab. Med. 127 (2003) 326–330.  Back to cited text no. 27
    
28.
O. Pickering, R. Sarefuji, L. Ahmed, et al, Pleural TB: a common cause of pleural effusion in south London, Thorax 68 (2013) A176–177.  Back to cited text no. 28
    
29.
N.A. Hasaneen, M.E. Zaki, H.M. Shalaby, et al, Polymerase chain reaction of pleural biopsy is a rapid and sensitive method for the diagnosis of tuberculous pleural effusion, Chest 124 (2003) 2105–2111.  Back to cited text no. 29
    
30.
K. Steigart, N.G. Vivienne, M. Henry, et al, Sputum processing methods to improve the sensitivity of smear microscopy for tuberculosis: a systematic review, Lancet Infect. Dis. 6 (2006) 664–674.  Back to cited text no. 30
    
31.
C.A. Saceanu, N.C. Pfeiffer, T. Mclean, Evaluation of sputum smears concentrated by cytocentrifugation for detection of acid-fast, J. Clin. Microbiol. 31 (1993) 2371–2374.  Back to cited text no. 31
    
32.
L. Valdé s, D. Alvarez, E. San Jose, et al, Tuberculous pleurisy: a study of 254 patients, Arch. Intern. Med. 158 (1998) 2017–2021.  Back to cited text no. 32
    
33.
L.A. Helala, G.M. El-Assal, A.A. Farghally, et al, Diagnostic yield of medical thoracoscopy in cases of undiagnosed pleural effusion in Kobri El-Kobba Military Hospital, Egypt J. Chest. Dis. Tuberc. 63 (2014) 629–634.  Back to cited text no. 33
    
34.
G. Huang, Y. Cheng, J. Su, et al, Application of flexirigid thoracoscopy in the diagnosis of pleural disease with unknown etiology, Nan. Fang. Yi. Ke. Da. Xue. Xue. Bao. 31 (2011) 669–673.  Back to cited text no. 34
    
35.
S.Y. Ruan, Y.C. Chuang, J.Y.Wang, et al, Revisiting tuberculous pleurisy: pleural fluid characteristics and diagnostic yield of mycobacterial culture in an endemic area, Thorax 67 (2012) 822–827.  Back to cited text no. 35
    
36.
M. Amini, D. Attaran, K. Ghazvini, et al, Tissue PCR diagnosis of patients suspicious for tuberculous pleurisy, Iran J. Basic. Med. Sci. 12 (2008) 121–125.  Back to cited text no. 36
    
37.
H.K. Yum, S.J. Choi, Detection of mycobacterial DNA using nested polymerase chain reaction of pleural biopsy specimens: compared to pathological findings, Korean J. Intern. Med. 18 (2003) 89–93.  Back to cited text no. 37
    
38.
N.J. Kim, S.C. Hong, J.O. Kim, et al, Etiologic considerations of nonspecific pleuritis, Korean J. Intern. Med. 6 (1991) 58–63.  Back to cited text no. 38
    
39.
F. Oshita, T. Kanda, K. Hara, Prognosis of nonspecific pleuritis diagnosed by cope needle biopsy, Jpn. J. Chest. Dis. 48 (1989)343–348.  Back to cited text no. 39
    
40.
P.A. Jenkins, The laboratory diagnosis of mycobacterial disease, Commun. Dis. Rep. CDR Rev. 2 (1992) R101–103.  Back to cited text no. 40
    
41.
D. Karnek, O. Kayacan, S. Beder, Reactivation of pulmonary tuberculosis in malignancy, Tumori 88 (2002) 251–254.  Back to cited text no. 41
    
42.
H.I. Libshitz, H.K. Pannu, L.S. Elting, et al, Tuberculosis in cancer patients: an update, J. Thorac. Imaging 12 (1997) 41–46.  Back to cited text no. 42
    
43.
S. Cicenas, V. Vencevicius, Lung cancer in patients with tuberculosis, World J. Surg. Oncol. 55 (2007) 22.  Back to cited text no. 43
    
44.
K. Chawla, S. Gupta, C. Mukhopadhyay, et al, PCR for M. Tuberculosis in tissue samples, J. Infect. Dev. Ctries. 3 (2009) 83–87.  Back to cited text no. 44
    
45.
S.K. Katiyar, R.P. Singh, K.P. Singh, Cultivation of Mycobacterium tuberculosis from pleural tissue and its histopathology in suspected cases of tuberculous pleural effusion, Indian J. Pathol. Microbiol. 40 (1997) 51–54.  Back to cited text no. 45
    
46.
J. Ferrer, Pleural tuberculosis, Eur. Respir. J. 10 (1997) 942–947.  Back to cited text no. 46
    
47.
F. Rosso, C.T. Michelon, R.D. Sperhacke, et al, Evaluation of real time PCR of patient pleural effusion for diagnosis of tuberculosis, BMC Res. Notes 4 (2011) 279–22.  Back to cited text no. 47
    


    Figures

  [Figure 1], [Figure 2]
 
 
    Tables

  [Table 1], [Table 2], [Table 3], [Table 4], [Table 5], [Table 6], [Table 7]


This article has been cited by
1 Tuberculous pleural effusion: diagnosis & management
Leila Antonangelo,Caroline S. Faria,Roberta K. Sales
Expert Review of Respiratory Medicine. 2019; : 1
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
2 A case report of tuberculous empyema: A tricky disease
Muhammad Tufail
International Journal of Mycobacteriology. 2019; 8(3): 302
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
3 A novel aptamer-based test for the rapid and accurate diagnosis of pleural tuberculosis
Pooja Kumari,Surabhi Lavania,Shaifali Tyagi,Abhijeet Dhiman,Deepak Rath,Divya Anthwal,Rakesh Kumar Gupta,Neera Sharma,A.K. Gadpayle,R.S. Taneja,Lokesh Sharma,Yusra Ahmad,Tarun Kumar Sharma,Sagarika Haldar,Jaya Sivaswami Tyagi
Analytical Biochemistry. 2019; 564-565: 80
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
4 Disseminated tuberculosis in the differential diagnosis of hemophagocytic syndrome
Oscar M P Jolobe
The American Journal of the Medical Sciences. 2018;
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
5 Challenges in pleural tuberculosis diagnosis: existing reference standards and nucleic acid tests
Shaifali Tyagi,Neera Sharma,Jaya Sivaswami Tyagi,Sagarika Haldar
Future Microbiology. 2017;
[Pubmed] | [DOI]



 

Top
 
 
  Search
 
Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
Access Statistics
Email Alert *
Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)

 
  In this article
Abstract
Introduction
Patients and methods
Results
Discussion
Conflicts of int...
Appendix A. Supp...
References
Article Figures
Article Tables

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed765    
    Printed20    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded90    
    Comments [Add]    
    Cited by others 5    

Recommend this journal