Published: 2019-09-23

Diagnosis of pulmonary tuberculosis with cartridge based nucleic acid amplification test and light emitting diode fluorescent microscopy: a comparative study

Pratik Kumar, Puneet Bhardwaj


Background: Due to low sensitivity and inability to detect drug resistance, smear microscopy limits its impact on TB control. Culture methods and drug susceptibility testing is complex, time consuming, and takes around 6-8 weeks. A new diagnostic test, cartridge based nucleic acid amplification test (CBNAAT) was developed based on real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT PCR). Objective of this study to compare the results of CBNAAT for diagnosis of pulmonary tuberculosis with LED fluorescent microscopy and sputum culture.

Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted in the department of Chest and TB, CIMS, Bilaspur. Each Sputum sample of presumptive TB patients were tested with CBNAAT, sputum smear  microscopy by light emitting diode (LED) fluorescent microscopy (FM) and solid and liquid culture for diagnosis of Tuberculosis. Results of CBNAAT, Fluorescent Microscopy and Culture for detection of Mycobacterium Tuberculosis were compared.

Results: The sensitivity and specificity for CBNAAT were 97% and 100% respectively; while that for Fluorescent microscopy were 70% and 100% respectively. The positive and negative predictive value for CBNAAT was 100% and 96% respectively. The positive and negative predictive value for Fluorescent microscopy was 100% and 73% respectively.

Conclusion: CBNAAT is having high sensitivity and specificity for diagnosis of pulmonary tuberculosis. It should be routinely used under national health programme to detect a tuberculosis case efficiently.


Cartridge based nucleic acid amplification test, Culture, Fluorescent, Light emitting diode, Microscopy, Sputum

Full Text:



WHO. Global tuberculosis report 2018. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2018.

WHO. Fluorescent light-emitting diode (LED) microscopy for diagnosis of tuberculosis: policy statement. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization; 2011.

Urdea M, Penny LA, Olmsted SS, Giovanni MY, Kaspar P, Shepherd A, et al. Requirements for high impact diagnostics in the developing world. Nature. 2006Nov22;444(1):73-9.

Mamilla R, Suhasini S. Sensitivity of FM staining versus ZN staining in diagnosing sputum smear positive PTB. IOSR J Dental and Medical Sci. 2015;14(3):29-33.

Xpert MTB/RIF implementation manual Implementation Manual. 2014. Avilable at Accessed 17 August 2017.

Ioannidis P, Papaventsis D, Karabela S, Nikolaou S, Panagi M, Raftopoulou E, et al. Cepheid GeneXpert MTB/RIF assay for Mycobacterium tuberculosis detection and rifampin resistance identification in patients with substantial clinical indications of tuberculosis and smear-negative microscopy results. J clin microbiol. 2011Aug1;49(8):3068-70.

Armand S, Vanhuls P, Delcroix G, Courcol R, Lemaître N. Comparison of the Xpert MTB/RIF test with an IS6110-TaqMan real-time PCR assay for direct detection of Mycobacterium tuberculosis in respiratory and non-respiratory specimens. J Clin Microbiol. 2011;49(5):1772-6.

Kandi S, Reddy V, Nagaraja SB. Diagnosis of pulmonary and extra pulmonary tuberculosis: How best is CBNAAT when compared to conventional methods of TB detection? Pulm Res Respir Med Open J. 2017;4(2):38-41.

Raizada N, Sachdeva KS, Sreenivas A, Kulsange S, Gupta RS, Thakur R, et al. Catching the missing million: Experiences in enhancing TB & amp; DR-TB detection by providing upfront xpert MTB/RIF testing for people living with HIV in India. PLoS One. 2015Feb 6;10(2):e0116721.