Gastric aspiration is not necessary for the diagnosis of pulmonary tuberculosis

  • P.-E. Bonnave
  • D. Raoult
  • M. DrancourtEmail author


Despite recommendations, gastric aspirate collected by invasive nasogastric aspiration is still routinely used for the direct detection of Mycobacterium tuberculosis in our institution. Reviewing 82 patients with culture-proven respiratory tuberculosis over a 28-month period, we observed no patient diagnosed solely by gastric aspirate analysis. Moreover, the diagnosis yield of gastric aspirate (60 %) did not significantly differ from that of stool specimen (64 %). These data confirm that gastric aspirate is no longer useful for the diagnosis of respiratory tuberculosis contrary to stool specimen.


Tuberculosis Pulmonary Tuberculosis Sputum Sample Stool Specimen Gastric Aspirate 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.


  1. 1.
    World Health Organization (WHO) (2012) Global tuberculosis control: WHO report 2011. WHO, GenevaGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    McNerney R, Maeurer M, Abubakar I, Marais B, McHugh TD, Ford N, Weyer K, Lawn S, Grobusch MP, Memish Z, Squire SB, Pantaleo G, Chakaya J, Casenghi M, Migliori GB, Mwaba P, Zijenah L, Hoelscher M, Cox H, Swaminathan S, Kim PS, Schito M, Harari A, Bates M, Schwank S, O’Grady J, Pletschette M, Ditui L, Atun R, Zumla A (2012) Tuberculosis diagnostics and biomarkers: needs, challenges, recent advances, and opportunities. J Infect Dis 205(Suppl 2):S147–S158PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Djelouadji Z, Arnold C, Gharbia S, Raoult D, Drancourt M (2008) Multispacer sequence typing for Mycobacterium tuberculosis genotyping. PLoS One 3:e2433PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    World Health Organization (WHO) (2010) Multidrug and extensively drug-resistant TB (M/XDR-TB): 2010 global report on surveillance and response. WHO, GenevaGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Pomputius WF 3rd, Rost J, Dennehy PH, Carter EJ (1997) Standardization of gastric aspirate technique improves yield in the diagnosis of tuberculosis in children. Pediatr Infect Dis J 16:222–226PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Procop GW, Roberts GD (2011) Laboratory diagnosis and susceptibility testing. In: Schlossberg D (ed) Tuberculosis and nontuberculous mycobacterial infections, 6th edn. ASM Press, Washington DC, pp 66–74Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Chierakul N, Anantasetagoon T, Chaiprasert A, Tingtoy N (2003) Diagnostic value of gastric aspirate smear and polymerase chain reaction in smear-negative pulmonary tuberculosis. Respirology 8:492–496PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    El Khéchine A, Henry M, Raoult D, Drancourt M (2009) Detection of Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex organisms in the stools of patients with pulmonary tuberculosis. Microbiology 155:2384–2389PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    El Khéchine A, Couderc C, Flaudrops C, Raoult D, Drancourt M (2011) Matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization time-of-flight mass spectrometry identification of mycobacteria in routine clinical practice. PLoS One 6:e24720PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Donald PR, Schaaf HS, Gie RP, Beyers N, Sirgel FA, Venter A (1996) Stool microscopy and culture to assist the diagnosis of pulmonary tuberculosis in childhood. J Trop Pediatr 42:311–312PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Oberhelman RA, Soto-Castellares G, Gilman RH, Caviedes L, Castillo ME, Kolevic L, Del Pino T, Saito M, Salazar-Lindo E, Negron E, Montenegro S, Laguna-Torres VA, Moore DA, Evans CA (2010) Diagnostic approaches for paediatric tuberculosis by use of different specimen types, culture methods, and PCR: a prospective case–control study. Lancet Infect Dis 10:612–620PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Oberhelman RA, Soto-Castellares G, Caviedes L, Castillo ME, Kissinger P, Moore DA, Evans C, Gilman RH (2006) Improved recovery of Mycobacterium tuberculosis from children using the microscopic observation drug susceptibility method. Pediatrics 118:e100–e106PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Best M, Sattar SA, Springthorpe VS, Kennedy ME (1990) Efficacies of selected disinfectants against Mycobacterium tuberculosis. J Clin Microbiol 28:2234–2239PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Rikimaru T, Kondo M, Kondo S, Oizumi K (2000) Efficacy of common antiseptics against mycobacteria. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis 4:570–576PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Peres PJ, Gevaudan MJ, Gulian C, de Micco P (1988) Une méthode de traitement des produits pathologiques en vue de l’isolement des mycobactéries. Revue Fr Lab 173:67–74Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ferroni A, Vu-Thien H, Lanotte P, Le Bourgeois M, Sermet-Gaudelus I, Fauroux B, Marchand S, Varaigne F, Berche P, Gaillard JL, Offredo C (2006) Value of the chlorhexidine decontamination method for recovery of nontuberculous mycobacteria from sputum samples of patients with cystic fibrosis. J Clin Microbiol 44:2237–2239PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Unité de Recherche sur les Maladies Infectieuses et Tropicales Emergentes (URMITE)UMR63 CNRS 7278, IRD 198, INSERM 1095, Aix-Marseille UniversitéMarseilleFrance
  2. 2.Unité des RickettsiesFaculté de MédecineMarseille cedex 5France

Personalised recommendations