Diagnosis of pulmonary sarcoidosis in tuberculosis endemic area—a narrative review

Abstract

Background and Objective Pulmonary sarcoidosis and tuberculosis (TB) are the most frequent tissue-confirmed granulomatous diseases. Due to its unknown etiology, pulmonary sarcoidosis is diagnosed by ruling out other granulomatous diseases and necessitating clinical, radiological, and pathological evidence. There are many factors that contribute to the diagnostic dilemma between these two diseases. Even though some aspects of both diseases, such as their pathological evidence and abnormal X-ray findings, are quite similar, the treatment options for each are entirely different. The standard treatment for sarcoidosis is immunosuppressive agents such as glucocorticoids, which can exacerbate TB. Consequently, the overlap between clinical and radiological features constitutes a significant challenge for many physicians in selecting the optimal treatment for each patient. Therefore, the exclusion of pulmonary TB is a mandatory step for the diagnosis of pulmonary sarcoidosis. This article reviews and summarizes basic science and clinical research on distinguishing these two disorders. Methods A systematic search of the MEDLINE and PubMed databases focusing on studies published within the last 35 years was conducted. The last search date is February 4, 2023. The authors used the following combinations of terms: tuberculosis, sarcoidosis, diagnosis, bronchoscopy, biomarkers, and radiography. All studies were reviewed, and 69 references from 1990 to 2023 were found to be relevant. Key Content and Findings Innovative laboratory tests are essential for distinguishing between pulmonary sarcoidosis and TB. The Xpert MTB/RIF assay diagnoses TB with 98% sensitivity and 89% specificity. Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP) and simultaneous amplification and testing method for Mycobacterium tuberculosis rRNA (SAT-TB) are also highly sensitive and specific for TB diagnosis. Several novel tests, such as the difference of immune complexes for the ESAT-6/SFP-10 antigen in vitro with dynamic light scattering (DLS), lung tissue-based molecular markers, and the blood transcriptome, are promising for differentiating TB from sarcoidosis. Conclusions Recent advancements in laboratory investigations, non-invasive procedures, and invasive procedures play an important role in the diagnosis of sarcoidosis in TB-endemic areas. However, further study is needed to evaluate the diagnostic performance of all tests in terms of their competency in distinguishing between TB and sarcoidosis.

Analysis of the Validity of Urine LAM ELISA for Tuberculosis Infection

“…MTB culture, and T lymphocytes γ-Interferon analysis, molecular amplification, etc. [2][3][4][5][6][7][8] In HIV/AIDS populations with immune disorders, samples with low levels of MTB bacteria may limit the validity of traditional etiological diagnosis. The report showed that from 2016 to 2020, the popularization rate of MTB molecular diagnostic technology in 11 prefecture-level city disease prevention and control center laboratories in Hebei Province reached over 90%, but the positive rates of MTB pathogen were below 36.28%.…”