Home|Journals|Articles by Year|Audio Abstracts
 

Original Research

RMJ. 2022; 47(2): 315-318


Frequency and comparison of validity parameters of sputum Acid Fast Bacilli on Ziehl Neelsen and auramine fluorescent microscopy in pulmonary tuberculosis keeping Gene Xpert as gold standard

Mohammad Sajjad Khattak, Zubaida Khanum, Naseeb ur Rehman Shah, Rafi Ullah Khattak, Abdul Ghafoor, Asif Mehmood.




Abstract

Objective: To see the frequency and to compare the sensitivity, specificity and negative predictive values of Acid Fast Bacilli by Ziehl Neelsen and Auramine Flourescent microscopy in pulmonary tuberculosis.
Methodology: This descriptive cross sectional study was done at Pathology Department, Khalifa Gul Nawaz Teaching Hospital, Bannu, KPK, Pakistan from January 2012 to December 2013. A total of 1000 sputum specimen were selected by non-probability random sampling technique. Gene Xpert was ready for analysis of the sample. Result after two hours was plotted as 1- Positive/negative for Acid Fast Bacilli. 2- Rifampicin sensitive/resistant. All specimens were subjected to both Ziehl Neelsen staining as well as Flourescent staining with Auramine to see their comparative positive yield. Chi Square test was used to compare yield of Ziehl Neelsen stain and Auramine fluorescent stain.
Results: All Gene Xpert positive cases were positive on Flourescent Microscopy as well as Zieh Neelsen Technique and all F.M. positive cases were positive by Z.N. technique (p

Key words: Sputum AFB, pulmonary tuberculosis, Gene Xpert, fluorescent microscopy, Zeil Nelson stain.






Full-text options


Share this Article


Online Article Submission
• ejmanager.com




ejPort - eJManager.com
Refer & Earn
JournalList
About BiblioMed
License Information
Terms & Conditions
Privacy Policy
Contact Us

The articles in Bibliomed are open access articles licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY), which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.