The polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and its variations, such as the nested-PCR, have been described as promising techniques for rapid diagnosis of tuberculosis (TB). With the aim of evaluating the usefulness of a nested-PCR method on samples of blood and urine of patients suspected of tuberculosis we analyzed 192 clinical samples, using as a molecular target the insertion element IS6110 specific of M. tuberculosis genome. Nested-PCR method showed higher sensitivity in patients with extrapulmonary tuberculosis (47.8% and 52% in blood and urine) when compared to patients with the pulmonary form of the disease (sensitivity of 29% and 26.9% in blood and urine), regardless of the type of biological sample used. The nested-PCR is a rapid technique that, even if not showing a good sensitivity, should be considered as a helpful tool especially in the extrapulmonary cases or in cases where confirmatory diagnosis is quite difficult to be achieved by routine methods. The performance of PCR-based techniques should be considered and tested in future works on other types of biological specimens besides sputum, like blood and urine, readily obtainable in most cases. The improving of M. tuberculosis nested-PCR detection in TB affected patients will give the possibility of an earlier detection of bacilli thus interrupting the transmission chain of the disease.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Introduction: Molecular analyses are auxiliary tools for detecting Koch's bacilli in clinical specimens from patients with suspected tuberculosis (TB). However, there are still no effi cient diagnostic tests that combine high sensitivity and specifi city and yield rapid results in the detection of TB. This study evaluated single-tube nested polymerase chain reaction (STNPCR) as a molecular diagnostic test with low risk of cross contamination for detecting Mycobacterium tuberculosis in clinical samples. Methods: Mycobacterium tuberculosis deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) was detected in blood and urine samples by STNPCR followed by agarose gel electrophoresis. In this system, reaction tubes were not opened between the two stages of PCR (simple and nested). Results: STNPCR demonstrated good accuracy in clinical samples with no cross contamination between microtubes. Sensitivity in blood and urine, analyzed in parallel, was 35%-62% for pulmonary and 41%-72% for extrapulmonary TB. The specifi city of STNPCR was 100% in most analyses, depending on the type of clinical sample (blood or urine) and clinical form of disease (pulmonary or extrapulmonary). Conclusions: STNPCR was effective in detecting TB, especially the extrapulmonary form for which sensitivity was higher, and had the advantage of less invasive sample collection from patients for whom a spontaneous sputum sample was unavailable. With low risk of cross contamination, the STNPCR can be used as an adjunct to conventional methods for diagnosing TB.