journal review tbm vs ccm

22
JOURNAL REVIEW JOURNAL REVIEW TUBERCULOUS AND TUBERCULOUS AND CRYPTOCOCCAL CRYPTOCOCCAL MENINGITIS IN A MENINGITIS IN A SETTING WITH HIGH TB SETTING WITH HIGH TB AND LOW HIV PREVALENCE AND LOW HIV PREVALENCE Afrasyab Khan, et al. Afrasyab Khan, et al. Hadio Ali K, MD Hadio Ali K, MD

Upload: hadioali2011

Post on 11-Mar-2015

40 views

Category:

Documents


1 download

DESCRIPTION

My journal reading work

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Journal Review TBM vs CCM

JOURNAL REVIEW JOURNAL REVIEW TUBERCULOUS AND TUBERCULOUS AND

CRYPTOCOCCAL CRYPTOCOCCAL MENINGITIS IN A SETTING MENINGITIS IN A SETTING WITH HIGH TB AND LOW WITH HIGH TB AND LOW

HIV PREVALENCEHIV PREVALENCEAfrasyab Khan, et al.Afrasyab Khan, et al.

Hadio Ali K, Hadio Ali K, MDMD

Page 2: Journal Review TBM vs CCM

The two most common types of The two most common types of chronic meningitis are tuberculous chronic meningitis are tuberculous meningitis (TBM) and cryptococcal meningitis (TBM) and cryptococcal meningitis (CCM)meningitis (CCM)

The classic cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) The classic cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) profile in TBM is lymphocytosis, high profile in TBM is lymphocytosis, high protein and low glucose while CCM protein and low glucose while CCM usually has the same clinical usually has the same clinical features and CSF findings as TBMfeatures and CSF findings as TBM

Cryptococcal meningitis is the most Cryptococcal meningitis is the most common opportunistic infection in common opportunistic infection in patients with HIV-1 infectionpatients with HIV-1 infection

BACKGROUNDBACKGROUND

Page 3: Journal Review TBM vs CCM

PROBLEMPROBLEM

The clinical presentation and CSF findings of TBM and CCM can be

similar

Difficult to diagnosis

Page 4: Journal Review TBM vs CCM

PROBLEMPROBLEM

Cryptococcal meningitis in HIV/AIDS patiens

UNDERDIAGNOSIS

Page 5: Journal Review TBM vs CCM

To find the differences in predisposing

factors, presentation, laboratory findings and outcome of patients with TBM and CCM to aid in early diagnosis

OBJECTIVE

Page 6: Journal Review TBM vs CCM

METHODSCase series comparison of TBM and CCM Review of patients data and records from December 1995-December 2005

Inclusion criteria : 1.Confirmed diagnosis of TBM and CCMThe diagnosis of TBM was confirmed by either apositive CSF culture of M. tuberculosis or by signs,symptoms along with suggestive results of

investigations and good response to anti tuberculosis medications

The diagnosis of CCM was confirmed by either a positive CSF smear, cryptococcal antigen test of CSF or CSF culture

2. Full work-up completed

Exclusion criteria : 1.Left the hospital against medical advice after

diagnosis 2.Full work-up was not completed

Page 7: Journal Review TBM vs CCM

DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE18 TBM cases 2 were excluded 16 TBM cases 1.One patient had positive CSF culture of M. TB2.Others based on clinical grounds along with suggestive CSF biochemical and cytological profile and findings compatible with TB on CT or MRI3.Twelve (75%) were male and four (25%) female with a mean age of 47.56 + 11.73 years4.Three had a previous history of pulmonary TB, one had a previous history of TB meningitis, and two had a previous history of hydrocephalus and a ventriculo-peritoneal shunt.5. None of the patients were HIV positive6.From 16 patients with TBM, 3 were determined to be in clinical stage 1 of the Medical Research Council (MRC) criteria (Table III), 11 in stage 2 and 2 in stage 37.RHZE + corticosteroid were given to all patients

Page 8: Journal Review TBM vs CCM

DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE12 TBM cases 1 was excluded 11 CCM cases 1.Nine patients were male and 2 female. The mean age was 50.63 + 11.84 years2.CSF culture was performed in 7 patients and was positive in all cases3.India ink test was positive in 5 cases4.Four out of 11 patients were HIV positive. Of those 4, two were identified as HIV positive for the first time after a diagnosis of cryptococcal meningitis was made. All were male. The remaining 7 patients had no apparent cause for immunosuppression5.Of the 11 patients with CCM, 4 were in clinical stage 1, 4 in stage 2 and 3 in stage 36.All patients were treated with a combination of amphotericin B and fluconazole + corticosteroid

Page 9: Journal Review TBM vs CCM
Page 10: Journal Review TBM vs CCM
Page 11: Journal Review TBM vs CCM
Page 12: Journal Review TBM vs CCM
Page 13: Journal Review TBM vs CCM
Page 14: Journal Review TBM vs CCM

DISCUSSIONDISCUSSIONDISCUSSIONDISCUSSION

Page 15: Journal Review TBM vs CCM

DISCUSSIONDISCUSSION

There were several differences of signs and symptoms There were several differences of signs and symptoms between the two groups (Table I). between the two groups (Table I). Nine patients (56.3%) with TBM had vomiting as opposed Nine patients (56.3%) with TBM had vomiting as opposed to 2 (18.2%) patients with CCM. to 2 (18.2%) patients with CCM. Only 1 patient (6.3%) with TBM had cough, while 6 Only 1 patient (6.3%) with TBM had cough, while 6 patients (54.5%) with CCM complained of cough. patients (54.5%) with CCM complained of cough. Altered mental status was more common in patients with Altered mental status was more common in patients with TBM. Eleven patients (68.8%) with TBM had altered mental TBM. Eleven patients (68.8%) with TBM had altered mental status as opposed to 4 patients (36.4%) with CCM.status as opposed to 4 patients (36.4%) with CCM.Neck stiffness was not reported in 44% patients with TBM Neck stiffness was not reported in 44% patients with TBM and in 64% patients with CCM.and in 64% patients with CCM.Four patients (25%) with TBM experienced seizures while Four patients (25%) with TBM experienced seizures while only 1 (9.1%) with CCM had seizuresonly 1 (9.1%) with CCM had seizures

Page 16: Journal Review TBM vs CCM

CLASSIC SIGNSCLASSIC SIGNS

Page 17: Journal Review TBM vs CCM

DISCUSSIONDISCUSSIONThere were several differences of laboratorium results There were several differences of laboratorium results between the two groups (Table II). between the two groups (Table II). The Mean CSF glucose in TBM was 65.66 m/dL in stage The Mean CSF glucose in TBM was 65.66 m/dL in stage 1, 51.45 mg/dL in stage 2 and 38.00 mg/dL in stage 3 1, 51.45 mg/dL in stage 2 and 38.00 mg/dL in stage 3 while in CCM cases the mean CSF glucose levels in stage while in CCM cases the mean CSF glucose levels in stage 1, 2 and 3 were 36.75 mg/dL, 11.25 mg/dL and 55.66 1, 2 and 3 were 36.75 mg/dL, 11.25 mg/dL and 55.66 mg/dLmg/dLThe mean CSF protein in TBM was 52.43 mg/dL as The mean CSF protein in TBM was 52.43 mg/dL as opposed to 32.63 mg/dL in CCM. opposed to 32.63 mg/dL in CCM. The mean CSF RBCs in TBM was 2010/mm3, while in The mean CSF RBCs in TBM was 2010/mm3, while in CCM, it was 178.54/mm3.CCM, it was 178.54/mm3.The mean CSF glucose in TBM was 52.43 mg/dL while in The mean CSF glucose in TBM was 52.43 mg/dL while in CCM, it was 32.63 mg/dLCCM, it was 32.63 mg/dLAll patients still alive until last follow-up except for two All patients still alive until last follow-up except for two patients with CCM (one HIV and others DM)patients with CCM (one HIV and others DM)

Page 18: Journal Review TBM vs CCM

Mean concentration of proteins, Mean concentration of proteins, RBCs, and glucose in the CSF of RBCs, and glucose in the CSF of patients with TBM was higher patients with TBM was higher than those with CCMthan those with CCM

Page 19: Journal Review TBM vs CCM

ConclusionConclusion

Lowprevalence of HIV should not exclude thedifferential diagnosis of CCM

Patients withTBM are more likely to have altered mental status andhigher CSF RBCs

Classic sign of meningitis were not always present in all patients. complete investigation needed to diagnose the causes of meningitis

CCM are more likely tohave headache, cough and higher CSF WBCs

TBM and CCM should be suspected in all cases thatpresent with symptoms of chronic meningitis

Page 20: Journal Review TBM vs CCM

2

1

3

LimitationSmall sample size

and significance

analysis

Confounding factorNonrandomization

Page 21: Journal Review TBM vs CCM

The possibility of CCM should be kept in The possibility of CCM should be kept in mind eventhough in low HIV mind eventhough in low HIV

prevalanceprevalance

Page 22: Journal Review TBM vs CCM