The Infectiousness of Tuberculosis Patients Coinfected with HIV

Department of Infectious Diseases and Immunity, Imperial College London, United Kingdom.
PLoS Medicine (Impact Factor: 14.43). 10/2008; 5(9):e188. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.0050188
Source: PubMed


The current understanding of airborne tuberculosis (TB) transmission is based on classic 1950s studies in which guinea pigs were exposed to air from a tuberculosis ward. Recently we recreated this model in Lima, Perú, and in this paper we report the use of molecular fingerprinting to investigate patient infectiousness in the current era of HIV infection and multidrug-resistant (MDR) TB.
All air from a mechanically ventilated negative-pressure HIV-TB ward was exhausted over guinea pigs housed in an airborne transmission study facility on the roof. Animals had monthly tuberculin skin tests, and positive reactors were removed for autopsy and organ culture for M. tuberculosis. Temporal exposure patterns, drug susceptibility testing, and DNA fingerprinting of patient and animal TB strains defined infectious TB patients. Relative patient infectiousness was calculated using the Wells-Riley model of airborne infection. Over 505 study days there were 118 ward admissions of 97 HIV-positive pulmonary TB patients. Of 292 exposed guinea pigs, 144 had evidence of TB disease; a further 30 were tuberculin skin test positive only. There was marked variability in patient infectiousness; only 8.5% of 118 ward admissions by TB patients were shown by DNA fingerprinting to have caused 98% of the 125 characterised cases of secondary animal TB. 90% of TB transmission occurred from inadequately treated MDR TB patients. Three highly infectious MDR TB patients produced 226, 52, and 40 airborne infectious units (quanta) per hour.
A small number of inadequately treated MDR TB patients coinfected with HIV were responsible for almost all TB transmission, and some patients were highly infectious. This result highlights the importance of rapid TB drug-susceptibility testing to allow prompt initiation of effective treatment, and environmental control measures to reduce ongoing TB transmission in crowded health care settings. TB infection control must be prioritized in order to prevent health care facilities from disseminating the drug-resistant TB that they are attempting to treat.

Download full-text


Available from: William K Y Pan,
  • Source
    • "resistant TB among previously treated patients are treated with category 2 regimens instead of agents designated for treating MDR-TB; this anomaly is responsible for resistant TB transmission (Escombe et al., 2008). Drug resistant TB is high among previously treated TB patients (Andrews et al., 2010) and especially previously treated HIV infected TB patients (Seithi et al., 2013) and this is capable of worsening disease progression and subsequently raising TB mortality rates. "

    Merit Research Journal of Medicine and Medical Sciences 04/2015; 3(4):130-134. · 0.68 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "Quanta values are typically calculated from past outbreaks, which may be based on unreliable outbreak or ventilation data. While there are several studies that report quanta values for TB (Nardell et al. 1991; Beggs et al. 2003; Escombe et al. 2007, 2008), there are limited data for other pathogens. Values have been reported for influenza (Rudnick and Milton 2003; Liao et al. 2005), measles (Riley et al. 1978), and SARs (Liao et al. 2005), which could, with appropriate UV susceptibility data, be used to conduct preliminary assessments into effectiveness against these pathogens. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The effectiveness of ultraviolet irradiation at inactivating airborne pathogens is well proven, and the technology is also commonly promoted as an energy-efficient way of reducing infection risk in comparison to increasing ventilation. However, determining how and where to apply upper-room Ultraviolet Germicidal Irradiation devices for the greatest benefit is still poorly understood. This article links multi-zone infection risk models with energy calculations to assess the potential impact of a Ultraviolet Germicidal Irradiation installation across a series of inter-connected spaces, such as a hospital ward. A first-order decay model of ultraviolet inactivation is coupled with a room air model to simulate patient room and whole-ward level disinfection under different mixing and ultraviolet field conditions. Steady-state computation of quanta-concentrations is applied to the Wells-Riley equation to predict likely infection rates. Simulation of a hypothetical ward demonstrates the relative influence of different design factors for susceptible patients co-located with an infectious source or in nearby rooms. In each case, energy requirements are calculated and compared to achieving the same level of infection risk through improved ventilation. Ultraviolet devices are seen to be most effective where they are located close to the infectious source; however, when the location of the infectious source is not known, locating devices in patient rooms is likely to be more effective than installing them in connecting corridor or communal zones. Results show an ultraviolet system may be an energy-efficient solution to controlling airborne infection, particularly in semi-open hospital environments, and considering the whole ward rather than just a single room at the design stage is likely to lead to a more robust solution.
    01/2015; 21(1):99-111. DOI:10.1080/10789669.2014.983035
  • Source
    • "A similar effect may occur when a few individuals are responsible for shedding a disproportionately large number of infectious particles into the environment (supershedding). For example, a small number of patients in a hospital ward who received inadequate treatment for multi-drug resistant TB were responsible for 90% of transmission to a sentinel animal host [46]. Pathogen strain may also influence supershedding; particular strains of E. coli have been shown to induce supershedding in cattle, leading to many more secondary cases than other strains [47]. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Strains of many infectious agents differ in fundamental epidemiological parameters including transmissibility, virulence and pathology. We investigated whether genotypes of Mycobacterium bovis (the causative agent of bovine tuberculosis, bTB) differ significantly in transmissibility and virulence, combining data from a nine-year survey of the genetic structure of the M. bovis population in Northern Ireland with detailed records of the cattle population during the same period. We used the size of herd breakdowns as a proxy measure of transmissibility and the proportion of skin test positive animals (reactors) that were visibly lesioned as a measure of virulence. Average breakdown size increased with herd size and varied depending on the manner of detection (routine herd testing or tracing of infectious contacts) but we found no significant variation among M. bovis genotypes in breakdown size once these factors had been accounted for. However breakdowns due to some genotypes had a greater proportion of lesioned reactors than others, indicating that there may be variation in virulence among genotypes. These findings indicate that the current bTB control programme may be detecting infected herds sufficiently quickly so that differences in virulence are not manifested in terms of outbreak sizes. We also investigated whether pathology of infected cattle varied according to M. bovis genotype, analysing the distribution of lesions recorded at post mortem inspection. We concentrated on the proportion of cases lesioned in the lower respiratory tract, which can indicate the relative importance of the respiratory and alimentary routes of infection. The distribution of lesions varied among genotypes and with cattle age and there were also subtle differences among breeds. Age and breed differences may be related to differences in susceptibility and husbandry, but reasons for variation in lesion distribution among genotypes require further investigation.
    PLoS ONE 09/2013; 8(9):e74503. DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0074503 · 3.23 Impact Factor
Show more