结核病与肺部健康杂志 ›› 2018, Vol. 7 ›› Issue (2): 133-136.doi: 10.3969/j.issn.2095-3755.2018.02.012

• 论著 • 上一篇    下一篇

不同检测方法对肺结核诊断价值的分析

温保江,陈栋军,梁志勇,邓小懂   

  1. 511500 广东省清远市慢性病防治医院结核病区
  • 收稿日期:2018-05-08 出版日期:2018-06-15 发布日期:2018-08-02
  • 基金资助:
    广东省清远市科技计划项目(170803161900685)

Analysis on the diagnostic values of different detection methods for pulmonary tuberculosis

Bao-jiang WEN,Dong-jun CHEN,Zhi-yong LIANG,Xiao-dong. DENG   

  1. Tuberculosis Division, Qingyuan Center for Chronic Disease Control, Guangdong Province, Qingyuan 511500, China
  • Received:2018-05-08 Online:2018-06-15 Published:2018-08-02

摘要:

目的 评价不同检测方法对肺结核的诊断价值。方法 选取2017年1—12月广东省清远市慢性病防治医院收治的肺结核患者149例作为肺结核组,肺部非结核病患者96例作为非结核组。收集研究对象临床资料,并进行结核感染T细胞斑点试验(T-SPOT.TB)、结核菌素皮肤试验(TST)、痰涂片、痰培养、GeneXpert MTB/RIF检测,评价各检测方法的检测效能。结果 肺结核组患者病程≥30d者占65.8%(98/149),高于非结核组的52.1%(50/96),差异有统计学意义(χ2=4.57,P=0.032)。在所有检测方法中,痰液病原学检查的特异度最为理想,痰涂片、痰培养和GeneXpert MTB/RIF检测特异度分别为100.0%(96/96)、100.0%(96/96)、96.9%(93/96)。对各项检测的敏感度进行比较发现,T-SPOT.TB敏感度最高,为86.6%(129/149)。各检测方法约登指数由高到低依次为:TST+T-SPOT.TB(0.58)、GeneXpert MTB/RIF(0.54)、T-SPOT.TB(0.48)、痰培养(0.38)、TST(0.27)、痰涂片(0.24)。结论 痰病原学检查仍然是肺结核诊断的金标准;联合多项检测项目有助于涂阴肺结核的临床诊断。

关键词: 结核, 肺, 诊断, 鉴别, 实验室技术和方法, 评价研究

Abstract:

Objective To evaluate the diagnostic values of different detection methods for pulmonary tuberculosis (PTB).Methods From January to December of 2017, a total of 149 patients with PTB who were admitted to the Qingyuan Center for Chronic Disease Control, Guangdong Province were selected in the PTB group, and 96 patients with other pulmonary disease were selected in the non-PTB group. The clinical data of all study subjects were collected. The T-SPOT.TB, tuberculin skin test (TST), sputum smear microscopy, sputum culture, and GeneXpert MTB/RIF were performed. The diagnostic efficacies of these methods were evaluated comprehensively.Results 65.8% (98/149) of the patients in the PTB group had a disease course of ≥30 days, which was higher than 52.1% (50/96) of the patients in the non-PTB group. The difference was statistically significant (χ2=4.57, P=0.032). Among the tested methods, sputum etiological examinations had the best specificity. The specificities of sputum smear microscopy, sputum culture, and GeneXpert MTB/RIF were 100.0% (96/96), 100.0% (96/96), and 96.9% (93/96), respectively. As to the comparison in the sensitivity, T-SPOT.TB had the highest sensitivity of 86.6% (129/149). The rank of Youden index of each detection method, from high to low, was TST+T-SPOT.TB (0.58), GeneXpert MTB/RIF (0.54), T-SPOT.TB (0.48), sputum culture (0.38), TST (0.27), and smear smear microscopy (0.24).ConclusionThe sputum etiological examinations are still the gold standard for the diagnosis of PTB. The combination of multiple test methods can help the clinical diagnosis of smear-negative PTB.

Key words: Tuberculosis, pulmonary, Diagnosis, differential, Laboratory techniques and procedures, Evaluation studies