N J L M

 
Subscribe Via RSS
  • Home
  • About
    Salient Features Bibliographic Information Abstracting and Indexing Specialties Covered Publisher Journal Policy
  • Issues
    Current Issue Online Ahead of Print Archive Forthcoming issue
  • Editorial
    Editorial Statements Editorial-PeerReview Process Editorial Board Publication Ethics & Malpractice Join us
  • Authors
    Submit an Article Manuscript Instructions Manuscript Assistance Publication Charges Paid Services Early Online Publication Service
  • Reviewers
    Apply as Reviewer Reviewers Acknowledgment
  • Search
    Simple Search Advanced Search
  • Member
    Register Login
  • Contact
  • Subscription
Original article / research
Year : 2025 Month : October Volume : 14 Issue : 4 Page : MO05 - MO08 Full Version

Comparative Evaluation of Various Microbiological Diagnostic Methods for Tubercular Meningitis: A Cross-sectional Study From a Tertiary Care Hospital


Anuradha Sulania, Rajani Sharma, Stuti Kansra, Aman Sharma
1. Professor, Department of Microbiology, Dr. R.M.L Hospital and ABVIMS, New Delhi, India. 2. Associate Professor, Department of Microbiology, Rajmata Vijaya Raje Scindia Medical College, Bhilwara, Rajasthan, India. 3. SMO, Department of Microbiology, Dr. R.M.L Hospital and ABVIMS, New Delhi, India. 4. PhD Scholar, Department of Microbiology, Dr. R.M.L Hospital and ABVIMS, New Delhi, India.
 
Correspondence Address :
Dr. Anuradha Sulania,
Department of Microbiology, Dr. R.M.L Hospital and ABVIMS, New Delhi, India.
E-mail: dranuradha.pgirml@gmail.com
 
ABSTRACT
: Introduction: Tubercular Meningitis (TBM) is a major public health problem that results from the dissemination of Mycobacterium tuberculosis (MTB) to the Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) and meninges. Despite the availability of effective treatment options, the mortality rate remains high, primarily due to diagnostic uncertainty or delay.

Aim: To compare Ziehl-Neelsen (ZN) staining, liquid culture using the Mycobacterium Growth Indicator Tube (MGIT 960) system, and Cartridge-Based Nucleic Acid Amplification Test (CB-NAAT) in the diagnosis of TBM.

Materials and Methods: This cross-sectional study was conducted in the Department of Microbiology, ABVIMS and Dr. RML Hospital, New Delhi, India from 1st June 2020 to 28th February 2021. A total of 400 CSF samples from patients with clinical suspicion of TBM were included. Each sample was divided into three parts for ZN staining microscopy, CB-NAAT, and liquid culture using MGIT 960. Demographic details such as age and gender were recorded in a prescribed proforma. Validity parameters including sensitivity, specificity, Positive Predictive Value (PPV), and Negative Predictive Value (NPV) were evaluated using Epi Info version 7.2. A p-value of <0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results: Among the 400 clinically suspected patients, 48 (12%) were diagnosed positive for TBM. The majority of positive cases were observed in the 21-40 years age group, with an almost equal male-to-female ratio. The sensitivities of ZN staining, liquid culture, and CB-NAAT were 20.83%, 68.75%, and 76.19%, respectively. The specificity was 100% for all three diagnostic modalities. Among the 33 CB-NAAT-positive cases, eight patients were found to be rifampicin-resistant.

Conclusion: For early detection of Mycobacterium tuberculosis, CB-NAAT serves as a game-changer, as it provides results within two hours and simultaneously detects rifampicin resistance. Although liquid culture (MGIT) remains the gold standard for Mycobaterium tuberculosis detection, it requires approximately four to six weeks to yield results.
Keywords : Cartridge based nucleic acid amplification test, Cerebrospinal fluid, Mycobacterium growth indicator tube, Mycobacterium tuberculosis, Ziehl-neelsen
DOI and Others : DOI: 10.7860/NJLM/2025/75286.2937 Date of Submission: Sep 06, 2024 Date of Peer Review: Mar 23, 2025 Date of Acceptance: Jun 23, 2025 Date of Publishing: Oct 01, 2025 AUTHOR DECLARATION: • Financial or Other Competing Interests: None • Was Ethics Committee Approval obtained for this study? No • Was informed consent obtained from the subjects involved in the study? Yes • For any images presented appropriate consent has been obtained from the subjects. NA PLAGIARISM CHECKING METHODS: • Plagiarism X-checker: Sep 13, 2024 • Manual Googling: Jun 16, 2025 • iThenticate Software: Jun 21, 2025 (10%) ETYMOLOGY: Author Origin EMENDATIONS: 6
 
TABLES AND FIGURES
 
  • In This Article

    • Abstract
    • Material and Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Conclusion
    • Acknowledgement
    • References
  • Article Utilities

    • Readers Comments
    • Article in PDF
    • Citation Manager
    • How to Cite
    • Article Statistics
    • Print this Article
    • Send to a Friend
  • Go To Issues

    • Current Issue
    • Past Issues
  • Search Articles

    • Simple Search
    • Advance Search
  • Authors Facilities

    • Extensive Author Support
    • Submit Manuscript
    • ONLINE First Facility
    • NJLM Pre Publishing
  • Quick Links

    • REVIEWER
    • ACCESS STATISTICS
  • Users

    • Register
    • Log in
  • Pages

    • About
    • Issues
    • Editorials
    • Authors
    • Reviewers
    • Search
    • Contacts
  • Issues Archives

  • Affiliated Websites

    • JCDR Prepublishing
    • Neonatal Database Home
    • JCDR Neonatal Database download center