All Title Author
Keywords Abstract

PLOS ONE  2012 

Oral Antimicrobial Rinse to Reduce Mycobacterial Culture Contamination among Tuberculosis Suspects in Uganda: A Prospective Study

DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0038888

Full-Text   Cite this paper   Add to My Lib


Rationale Contamination by bacterial or fungal organisms reduces the effectiveness of mycobacterial culture for diagnosis of pulmonary tuberculosis (TB). We evaluated the effect of an anti-microbial and an anti-fungal oral rinse prior to expectoration on culture-contamination rates. Methods We enrolled a consecutive random sample of adults with cough for ≥2 weeks and suspected TB admitted to Mulago Hospital (Kampala, Uganda) between October 2008 and June 2009. We randomly assigned patients to oral rinse (60 seconds with chlorhexidine followed by 60 seconds with nystatin) vs. no oral rinse prior to initial sputum collection. Uganda National Tuberculosis Reference Laboratory technicians blinded to the method of sputum collection (with or without oral rinse) processed all sputum specimens for smear microscopy (direct Ziehl-Neelsen) and mycobacterial culture (Lowenstein-Jensen media). Results Of 220 patients enrolled, 177 (80%) were HIV-seropositive (median CD4-count 37 cells/uL, IQR 13–171 cells/uL). Baseline characteristics were similar between patients in the oral-rinse (N = 110) and no oral-rinse (N = 110) groups. The proportion of contaminated cultures was significantly lower in the oral-rinse group compared to the no oral-rinse group (4% vs. 15%, risk difference ?11%, 95% CI ?18 to ?3%, p = 0.005). Oral rinse significantly reduced the proportion of contaminated cultures among HIV-infected patients (3% vs. 18%, risk difference ?14%, 95% CI ?23 to ?6%, p = 0.002) but not HIV-uninfected (6% vs. 4%, risk difference 2%, 95% CI ?12 to +15%, p = 0.81) patients. However, the proportion of smear-positive specimens (25% vs. 35%, p = 0.10) and culture-positive specimens (48% vs. 56%, p = 0.24) were lower in the oral-rinse compared to the no oral-rinse group, although the differences were not statistically significant. Conclusions Oral rinse prior to sputum expectoration is a promising strategy to reduce mycobacterial culture contamination in areas with high HIV prevalence, if strategies can be devised to reduce the adverse impact of oral rinse on smear- and culture-positivity.


[1]  WHO Report (2011) Global Tuberculosis Control. Available:
[2]  Whittier S, Hopfer RL, Knowles MR, Gilligan PH (1993) Improved recovery of Mycobacteria for respiratory secretions of patients with cystic fibrosis. J Clin Microbiol 31: 861–864.
[3]  Muyoyeta M, Schaap JA, De Haas P, Mwanza W, Muvwimi MW, et al. (2009) Comparison of four culture systems for Mycobacterium tuberculosis in the Zambian National Reference Laboratory. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis 13(4): 460–465.
[4]  Muzanye G, Morgan K, Johnson J, Mayanja-Kizza H (2009) Impact of mouth rinsing before sputum collection on culture contamination. Afri Health Sci 9(3): 200.
[5]  Verweij KE, Kamerik AR, van Ingen J, van Dijk JH, Sikwangala P, et al. (2010) Application of modern microbiological diagnostic methods for tuberculosis in Macha, Zambia. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis 14(9): 1127–1131.
[6]  Otu J, Antonio M, Cheung YB, Donkor S, De Jong BC, et al. (2008) Comparative evaluation of BACTEC MGIT 960 with BACTEC 9000 MB and LJ for isolation of mycobacteria in The Gambia. J Infect Dev Ctries 2(3): 200–205.
[7]  Chihota VN, Grant AD, Fielding K, Ndibongo B, van Zyl A, et al. (2010) Liquid vs. solid culture for tuberculosis: performance and cost in a resource-constrained setting. J Tuberc Lung Dis 14(8): 1024–1031.
[8]  Huang TS, Chen CS, Lee SS, Huang WK, Liu YC (2001) Comparison of the BACTEC MGIT 960 and BACTEC 460 TB systems for detection of Mycobacteria in clinical specimens. Clin Lab Sci 31(3): 279–283.
[9]  World Health Organization. Guidelines on Standard Operating Procedures for MICROBIOLOGY. Communicable Diseases Department. Blood Safety and Clinical Technology. Available:
[10]  Kent PT, Kubica GP (1985) Public Health Microbiology: a Guide for the Level III Laboratory. Centers for Disease Control laboratory manual. U.S Department of Health and Human Services. Centers for Disease Control, Atlanta.
[11]  Mitchison DA, Allen BW, Carrol L, Dickinson JM, Aber VR (1972) A selective oleic acid albumin agar medium for tubercle bacilli. J Med Microbiol. 5(2): 165–175.
[12]  Khan MS, Dar O, Sismanidis C, Shah K, Godfrey-Faussett P (2007) Improvement of tuberculosis case detection and reduction of discrepancies between men and women by simple sputum-submission instructions: a pragmatic randomised controlled trial. The Lancet 369(9577): 1955–1960.
[13]  Peres RL, Palaci MS, Loureiro RB, Dietze R, Johnson JL, et al. (2011) Evaluation of Oral Antiseptic Rinsing before Sputum Collection To Reduce Contamination of Mycobacterial Culture. J Clin Microbiol 49(8): 3058–3060.
[14]  Williams D, Lewis M (2011) Pathogenesis and treatment of oral candidosis. J Oral Microbiol 3.
[15]  Mataftsi M, Skoura L, Sakellari D (2011) HIV infection and periodontal diseases: an overview of the post-HAART era. Oral Dis. 17(1): 13–25.
[16]  Kyeyune R, Boon SD, Cattamanchi A, Davis JL, Worodria W, et al. (2010) Causes of early mortality in HIV infected TB suspects in an East African Referral Hospital. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 55(4): 446–450.
[17]  Russell AD (1996) Activity of biocides against mycobacteria. Soc Appl Bacteriol Symp Ser 25: 87S–101S.
[18]  Fodor T, Szabo I (1980) Effect of chlorhexidine gluconate on the survival of acid fast bacteria. Acta Microbiol Acad Sci Hung 27(4): 343–344.


comments powered by Disqus