Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research, ISSN - 0973 - 709X

Users Online : 44243

AbstractMaterial and MethodsResultsDiscussionConclusionReferencesDOI and Others
Article in PDF How to Cite Citation Manager Readers' Comments (0) Audio Visual Article Statistics Link to PUBMED Print this Article Send to a Friend
Advertisers Access Statistics Resources

Dr Mohan Z Mani

"Thank you very much for having published my article in record time.I would like to compliment you and your entire staff for your promptness, courtesy, and willingness to be customer friendly, which is quite unusual.I was given your reference by a colleague in pathology,and was able to directly phone your editorial office for clarifications.I would particularly like to thank the publication managers and the Assistant Editor who were following up my article. I would also like to thank you for adjusting the money I paid initially into payment for my modified article,and refunding the balance.
I wish all success to your journal and look forward to sending you any suitable similar article in future"



Dr Mohan Z Mani,
Professor & Head,
Department of Dermatolgy,
Believers Church Medical College,
Thiruvalla, Kerala
On Sep 2018




Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar

"Over the last few years, we have published our research regularly in Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research. Having published in more than 20 high impact journals over the last five years including several high impact ones and reviewing articles for even more journals across my fields of interest, we value our published work in JCDR for their high standards in publishing scientific articles. The ease of submission, the rapid reviews in under a month, the high quality of their reviewers and keen attention to the final process of proofs and publication, ensure that there are no mistakes in the final article. We have been asked clarifications on several occasions and have been happy to provide them and it exemplifies the commitment to quality of the team at JCDR."



Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar
Head, Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad
Chairman, Research Group, Charutar Arogya Mandal, Karamsad
National Joint Coordinator - Advanced IAP NNF NRP Program
Ex-Member, Governing Body, National Neonatology Forum, New Delhi
Ex-President - National Neonatology Forum Gujarat State Chapter
Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad, Anand, Gujarat.
On Sep 2018




Dr. Kalyani R

"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research is at present a well-known Indian originated scientific journal which started with a humble beginning. I have been associated with this journal since many years. I appreciate the Editor, Dr. Hemant Jain, for his constant effort in bringing up this journal to the present status right from the scratch. The journal is multidisciplinary. It encourages in publishing the scientific articles from postgraduates and also the beginners who start their career. At the same time the journal also caters for the high quality articles from specialty and super-specialty researchers. Hence it provides a platform for the scientist and researchers to publish. The other aspect of it is, the readers get the information regarding the most recent developments in science which can be used for teaching, research, treating patients and to some extent take preventive measures against certain diseases. The journal is contributing immensely to the society at national and international level."



Dr Kalyani R
Professor and Head
Department of Pathology
Sri Devaraj Urs Medical College
Sri Devaraj Urs Academy of Higher Education and Research , Kolar, Karnataka
On Sep 2018




Dr. Saumya Navit

"As a peer-reviewed journal, the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research provides an opportunity to researchers, scientists and budding professionals to explore the developments in the field of medicine and dentistry and their varied specialities, thus extending our view on biological diversities of living species in relation to medicine.
‘Knowledge is treasure of a wise man.’ The free access of this journal provides an immense scope of learning for the both the old and the young in field of medicine and dentistry as well. The multidisciplinary nature of the journal makes it a better platform to absorb all that is being researched and developed. The publication process is systematic and professional. Online submission, publication and peer reviewing makes it a user-friendly journal.
As an experienced dentist and an academician, I proudly recommend this journal to the dental fraternity as a good quality open access platform for rapid communication of their cutting-edge research progress and discovery.
I wish JCDR a great success and I hope that journal will soar higher with the passing time."



Dr Saumya Navit
Professor and Head
Department of Pediatric Dentistry
Saraswati Dental College
Lucknow
On Sep 2018




Dr. Arunava Biswas

"My sincere attachment with JCDR as an author as well as reviewer is a learning experience . Their systematic approach in publication of article in various categories is really praiseworthy.
Their prompt and timely response to review's query and the manner in which they have set the reviewing process helps in extracting the best possible scientific writings for publication.
It's a honour and pride to be a part of the JCDR team. My very best wishes to JCDR and hope it will sparkle up above the sky as a high indexed journal in near future."



Dr. Arunava Biswas
MD, DM (Clinical Pharmacology)
Assistant Professor
Department of Pharmacology
Calcutta National Medical College & Hospital , Kolkata




Dr. C.S. Ramesh Babu
" Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a multi-specialty medical and dental journal publishing high quality research articles in almost all branches of medicine. The quality of printing of figures and tables is excellent and comparable to any International journal. An added advantage is nominal publication charges and monthly issue of the journal and more chances of an article being accepted for publication. Moreover being a multi-specialty journal an article concerning a particular specialty has a wider reach of readers of other related specialties also. As an author and reviewer for several years I find this Journal most suitable and highly recommend this Journal."
Best regards,
C.S. Ramesh Babu,
Associate Professor of Anatomy,
Muzaffarnagar Medical College,
Muzaffarnagar.
On Aug 2018




Dr. Arundhathi. S
"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a reputed peer reviewed journal and is constantly involved in publishing high quality research articles related to medicine. Its been a great pleasure to be associated with this esteemed journal as a reviewer and as an author for a couple of years. The editorial board consists of many dedicated and reputed experts as its members and they are doing an appreciable work in guiding budding researchers. JCDR is doing a commendable job in scientific research by promoting excellent quality research & review articles and case reports & series. The reviewers provide appropriate suggestions that improve the quality of articles. I strongly recommend my fraternity to encourage JCDR by contributing their valuable research work in this widely accepted, user friendly journal. I hope my collaboration with JCDR will continue for a long time".



Dr. Arundhathi. S
MBBS, MD (Pathology),
Sanjay Gandhi institute of trauma and orthopedics,
Bengaluru.
On Aug 2018




Dr. Mamta Gupta,
"It gives me great pleasure to be associated with JCDR, since last 2-3 years. Since then I have authored, co-authored and reviewed about 25 articles in JCDR. I thank JCDR for giving me an opportunity to improve my own skills as an author and a reviewer.
It 's a multispecialty journal, publishing high quality articles. It gives a platform to the authors to publish their research work which can be available for everyone across the globe to read. The best thing about JCDR is that the full articles of all medical specialties are available as pdf/html for reading free of cost or without institutional subscription, which is not there for other journals. For those who have problem in writing manuscript or do statistical work, JCDR comes for their rescue.
The journal has a monthly publication and the articles are published quite fast. In time compared to other journals. The on-line first publication is also a great advantage and facility to review one's own articles before going to print. The response to any query and permission if required, is quite fast; this is quite commendable. I have a very good experience about seeking quick permission for quoting a photograph (Fig.) from a JCDR article for my chapter authored in an E book. I never thought it would be so easy. No hassles.
Reviewing articles is no less a pain staking process and requires in depth perception, knowledge about the topic for review. It requires time and concentration, yet I enjoy doing it. The JCDR website especially for the reviewers is quite user friendly. My suggestions for improving the journal is, more strict review process, so that only high quality articles are published. I find a a good number of articles in Obst. Gynae, hence, a new journal for this specialty titled JCDR-OG can be started. May be a bimonthly or quarterly publication to begin with. Only selected articles should find a place in it.
An yearly reward for the best article authored can also incentivize the authors. Though the process of finding the best article will be not be very easy. I do not know how reviewing process can be improved. If an article is being reviewed by two reviewers, then opinion of one can be communicated to the other or the final opinion of the editor can be communicated to the reviewer if requested for. This will help one’s reviewing skills.
My best wishes to Dr. Hemant Jain and all the editorial staff of JCDR for their untiring efforts to bring out this journal. I strongly recommend medical fraternity to publish their valuable research work in this esteemed journal, JCDR".



Dr. Mamta Gupta
Consultant
(Ex HOD Obs &Gynae, Hindu Rao Hospital and associated NDMC Medical College, Delhi)
Aug 2018




Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey

"I wish to thank Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), for asking me to write up few words.
Writing is the representation of language in a textual medium i e; into the words and sentences on paper. Quality medical manuscript writing in particular, demands not only a high-quality research, but also requires accurate and concise communication of findings and conclusions, with adherence to particular journal guidelines. In medical field whether working in teaching, private, or in corporate institution, everyone wants to excel in his / her own field and get recognised by making manuscripts publication.


Authors are the souls of any journal, and deserve much respect. To publish a journal manuscripts are needed from authors. Authors have a great responsibility for producing facts of their work in terms of number and results truthfully and an individual honesty is expected from authors in this regards. Both ways its true "No authors-No manuscripts-No journals" and "No journals–No manuscripts–No authors". Reviewing a manuscript is also a very responsible and important task of any peer-reviewed journal and to be taken seriously. It needs knowledge on the subject, sincerity, honesty and determination. Although the process of reviewing a manuscript is a time consuming task butit is expected to give one's best remarks within the time frame of the journal.
Salient features of the JCDR: It is a biomedical, multidisciplinary (including all medical and dental specialities), e-journal, with wide scope and extensive author support. At the same time, a free text of manuscript is available in HTML and PDF format. There is fast growing authorship and readership with JCDR as this can be judged by the number of articles published in it i e; in Feb 2007 of its first issue, it contained 5 articles only, and now in its recent volume published in April 2011, it contained 67 manuscripts. This e-journal is fulfilling the commitments and objectives sincerely, (as stated by Editor-in-chief in his preface to first edition) i e; to encourage physicians through the internet, especially from the developing countries who witness a spectrum of disease and acquire a wealth of knowledge to publish their experiences to benefit the medical community in patients care. I also feel that many of us have work of substance, newer ideas, adequate clinical materials but poor in medical writing and hesitation to submit the work and need help. JCDR provides authors help in this regards.
Timely publication of journal: Publication of manuscripts and bringing out the issue in time is one of the positive aspects of JCDR and is possible with strong support team in terms of peer reviewers, proof reading, language check, computer operators, etc. This is one of the great reasons for authors to submit their work with JCDR. Another best part of JCDR is "Online first Publications" facilities available for the authors. This facility not only provides the prompt publications of the manuscripts but at the same time also early availability of the manuscripts for the readers.
Indexation and online availability: Indexation transforms the journal in some sense from its local ownership to the worldwide professional community and to the public.JCDR is indexed with Embase & EMbiology, Google Scholar, Index Copernicus, Chemical Abstracts Service, Journal seek Database, Indian Science Abstracts, to name few of them. Manuscriptspublished in JCDR are available on major search engines ie; google, yahoo, msn.
In the era of fast growing newer technologies, and in computer and internet friendly environment the manuscripts preparation, submission, review, revision, etc and all can be done and checked with a click from all corer of the world, at any time. Of course there is always a scope for improvement in every field and none is perfect. To progress, one needs to identify the areas of one's weakness and to strengthen them.
It is well said that "happy beginning is half done" and it fits perfectly with JCDR. It has grown considerably and I feel it has already grown up from its infancy to adolescence, achieving the status of standard online e-journal form Indian continent since its inception in Feb 2007. This had been made possible due to the efforts and the hard work put in it. The way the JCDR is improving with every new volume, with good quality original manuscripts, makes it a quality journal for readers. I must thank and congratulate Dr Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief JCDR and his team for their sincere efforts, dedication, and determination for making JCDR a fast growing journal.
Every one of us: authors, reviewers, editors, and publisher are responsible for enhancing the stature of the journal. I wish for a great success for JCDR."



Thanking you
With sincere regards
Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey, M.S., M. Ch., FAIS
Associate Professor,
Department of Paediatric Surgery, Gandhi Medical College & Associated
Kamla Nehru & Hamidia Hospitals Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh 462 001 (India)
E-mail: drrajendrak1@rediffmail.com
On May 11,2011




Dr. Shankar P.R.

"On looking back through my Gmail archives after being requested by the journal to write a short editorial about my experiences of publishing with the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), I came across an e-mail from Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor, in March 2007, which introduced the new electronic journal. The main features of the journal which were outlined in the e-mail were extensive author support, cash rewards, the peer review process, and other salient features of the journal.
Over a span of over four years, we (I and my colleagues) have published around 25 articles in the journal. In this editorial, I plan to briefly discuss my experiences of publishing with JCDR and the strengths of the journal and to finally address the areas for improvement.
My experiences of publishing with JCDR: Overall, my experiences of publishing withJCDR have been positive. The best point about the journal is that it responds to queries from the author. This may seem to be simple and not too much to ask for, but unfortunately, many journals in the subcontinent and from many developing countries do not respond or they respond with a long delay to the queries from the authors 1. The reasons could be many, including lack of optimal secretarial and other support. Another problem with many journals is the slowness of the review process. Editorial processing and peer review can take anywhere between a year to two years with some journals. Also, some journals do not keep the contributors informed about the progress of the review process. Due to the long review process, the articles can lose their relevance and topicality. A major benefit with JCDR is the timeliness and promptness of its response. In Dr Jain's e-mail which was sent to me in 2007, before the introduction of the Pre-publishing system, he had stated that he had received my submission and that he would get back to me within seven days and he did!
Most of the manuscripts are published within 3 to 4 months of their submission if they are found to be suitable after the review process. JCDR is published bimonthly and the accepted articles were usually published in the next issue. Recently, due to the increased volume of the submissions, the review process has become slower and it ?? Section can take from 4 to 6 months for the articles to be reviewed. The journal has an extensive author support system and it has recently introduced a paid expedited review process. The journal also mentions the average time for processing the manuscript under different submission systems - regular submission and expedited review.
Strengths of the journal: The journal has an online first facility in which the accepted manuscripts may be published on the website before being included in a regular issue of the journal. This cuts down the time between their acceptance and the publication. The journal is indexed in many databases, though not in PubMed. The editorial board should now take steps to index the journal in PubMed. The journal has a system of notifying readers through e-mail when a new issue is released. Also, the articles are available in both the HTML and the PDF formats. I especially like the new and colorful page format of the journal. Also, the access statistics of the articles are available. The prepublication and the manuscript tracking system are also helpful for the authors.
Areas for improvement: In certain cases, I felt that the peer review process of the manuscripts was not up to international standards and that it should be strengthened. Also, the number of manuscripts in an issue is high and it may be difficult for readers to go through all of them. The journal can consider tightening of the peer review process and increasing the quality standards for the acceptance of the manuscripts. I faced occasional problems with the online manuscript submission (Pre-publishing) system, which have to be addressed.
Overall, the publishing process with JCDR has been smooth, quick and relatively hassle free and I can recommend other authors to consider the journal as an outlet for their work."



Dr. P. Ravi Shankar
KIST Medical College, P.O. Box 14142, Kathmandu, Nepal.
E-mail: ravi.dr.shankar@gmail.com
On April 2011
Anuradha

Dear team JCDR, I would like to thank you for the very professional and polite service provided by everyone at JCDR. While i have been in the field of writing and editing for sometime, this has been my first attempt in publishing a scientific paper.Thank you for hand-holding me through the process.


Dr. Anuradha
E-mail: anuradha2nittur@gmail.com
On Jan 2020

Important Notice

Original article / research
Year : 2022 | Month : May | Volume : 16 | Issue : 5 | Page : OC06 - OC11 Full Version

Clinical Profile and Treatment Response in Tuberculous Meningitis- A Comparison between HIV Positive and HIV Negative Patients


Published: May 1, 2022 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.7860/JCDR/2022/51702.16336
Nirja Ghanshyam Pandey, Dhirendra Shivprasad Yadav, Swati Arvind Chavan, Rupal Nilesh Padhiyar, Niteen Dattatray Karnik

1. Senior Resident, Department of Medicine, Lokmanya Tilak Municipal Medical College and General Hospital, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India. 2. Assistant Professor, Department of Medicine, Lokmanya Tilak Municipal Medical College and General Hospital, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India. 3. Professor and Unit Head, Department of Medicine, Lokmanya Tilak Municipal Medical College and General Hospital, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India. 4. Associate Professor, Department of Medicine, Lokmanya Tilak Municipal Medical College and General Hospital, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India. 5. Professor and Head, Department of Medicine, Lokmanya Tilak Municipal Medical College and General Hospital, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.

Correspondence Address :
Dhirendra Shivprasad Yadav,
'A' Wing, Flat No-401, 4th Floor, Shree Ganesh Apartment, Plot No: 265, Sector: 23, Juinagar, Navi Mumbai-400705, Maharashtra, India.
E-mail: dhirendra.md@gmail.com

Abstract

Introduction: Tuberculous Meningitis (TBM) is a common infection in patients with Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) and it shows significant differences in clinical profile, treatment response, and outcome compared to patients without HIV infection.

Aim: To describe the clinical presentation, laboratory parameters, and radiological findings of TBM patients with and without HIV co-infection and to observe differences between them in treatment response, complications, and mortality.

Materials and Methods: This was a prospective observational study, conducted on 80 TBM patients with (n=40) and without (n=40) HIV co-infection. Demographic, clinical, laboratory data, and various imaging findings were noted at the start of the study and at three and six months follow-up, for any changes from baseline to know the treatment response. Appropriate statistical tests were applied, and p-value less than 0.05 were considered statistically significant.

Results: Mean age of HIV patients was 36.75 years and that of the non HIV patients was 29.35 years (p<0.05). Altered sensorium (90% in HIV and 72.5% in non HIV), seizures (50% in HIV and 20% in non HIV) were common in HIV patients, and weight loss (95% in non HIV and 87.5% in HIV) was common in non HIV patients. Common signs noted were nuchal rigidity (90% in HIV and 87.5% in the non HIV group), focal neurological deficit (50% in HIV and 22.5% in non HIV), and cranial nerve palsy (37.5% in HIV and 12.5% in non HIV). Anaemia was seen in 56.3% (87.5% in HIV and 25% in non HIV) and raised Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (ESR) was seen in 56.3% (25% in HIV and 87.5% in non HIV) patients. Tuberculoma was the most common (32.5%) Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) brain finding. Adverse drugs reactions due to ATT (other causes ruled out) were seen in 22.5% of HIV patients (none in non HIV), and Antiretroviral Therapy (ART)-induced Adverse Drugs Effects (ADE) was noted in 10% of patients. Patient survival was better among non HIV (65%) compared to HIV (55%) patients. Multidrug-resistant Tuberculosis (MDR-TB) was more prevalent in HIV (7.5%) than non HIV (2.5%) cases.

Conclusion: TBM involves a younger population, has a worse prognosis in HIV co-infection patients with more adverse reactions to treatment.

Keywords

Antiretroviral therapy, Antituberculous therapy, Human immunodeficiency virus, Tuberculosis

India’s contribution of 1.8 million TB cases in 2020 was the highest (26% of the global cases) in the whole world as per the World Health Organisation (WHO) Global TB report 2021. Also, 38% of global TB death in HIV negative and 34% of combined (HIV positive and HIV negative) TB deaths were contributed by India in 2020. The risk of developing TB is estimated to be between 15-21 times greater in people living with HIV than those without HIV infection (1). Globally, 37.7 million people were living with HIV in 2020 with 1.5 million new cases and about 0.68 million dying from HIV-related causes (2).

Tuberculosis is the most common opportunistic infection in HIV infected persons (3). Cases of TBM are commonly seen in HIV patients even though the exact incidence and prevalence have been not known. Many observational studies have shown no major difference in clinical features, laboratory investigations, radiological findings, treatment response in TB patients with HIV and without it (4),(5).

Literature is replete with studies that highlight the difference between the clinical presentations of HIV-TB co-infection with those of non HIV TBM. Clinically, TBM with HIV co-infection presents with more altered sensorium and impaired cognition compared to non HIV patients (6),(7). Laboratory parameters of HIV-TBM in various studies have shown Cerebrospinal Fluid (CSF) features like low CSF cell count, low protein and high CSF mycobacterial culture yield and haematological features of anaemia and hyponatremia (6),(7),(8),(9). They also have evidence of extrameningeal disease with more meningeal enhancement and cerebral infarcts on brain imaging compared to non HIV TBM patients (5),(6),(7),(8),(10). Response to treatment is poor in HIV-TBM patients due to high incidence MDR-TB and ART drug interactions as well as they have poor outcome with high mortality as shown by various studies (5),(6),(7),(8),(9),(10).

As per WHO and National AIDS Control Organisation (NACO) guidelines, all HIV infected TB patients should be started on ART with whatever CD4 counts they have, usually after two weeks of starting AKT and before two months (eight weeks); except for those with CD4 less than 50/cmm where ART should be started within two weeks. In TBM patients with HIV co-infection, caution is needed since immediate ART (2-8 weeks) can lead to more severe adverse events like immune reconstitution inflammatory syndrome instead of initiating ART two months after the start of TB treatment (11),(12). Patients with HIV-TB co-infection have a very high incidence of multi-drug resistant TB along with increased mortality rate (13),(14). As major differences in clinical, laboratory and radiological features are noted in TBM patients co-infected with HIV along with high mortality and MDR-TB rates compared to non HIV TBM, it becomes essential to study them. It was an unmet need for to conduct this study at this tertiary care centre to identify and compare various clinical presentations, laboratory investigations, radiographic features, and outcomes among TBM cases in patients with and without HIV co-infection.

Material and Methods

This was a prospective observational study conducted on 80 TBM patients (40 with HIV co-infection and 40 without HIV) at LTMMC, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India; over 18 months from March 2016 to August 2017. Approval of Institutional Ethics Committee (IEC) was taken for the study (letter number: SRS/184/16 (Reference ID: D0201681) dated 30/03/2016).

Inclusion criteria: All HIV positive and HIV negative patients, >12 years of age with history of fever for five days or more, with features suggestive of meningitis (headache neck pain and neck stiffness with weight loss or poor weight gain, night sweats) or with features suggestive of encephalitis (altered sensorium, focal deficits, seizures) with or without the involvement of cranial nerves and pyramidal tracts or combination of both. Patients with CSF findings or cerebral imaging findings (Computed Tomography (CT)/MRI finding suggestive of hydrocephalus/basal meningeal enhancement/infarct/tuberculoma) fulfilling Marais criteria for TBM were included (15).

Exclusion criteria: All HIV positive and HIV negative patients already on antitubercular therapy for TB elsewhere were excluded from the study.

Sample size calculation: The incidence of TB patients was approximately 800-1200 patients/year at the study centre with around 10% incidence of TBM (approximately 80-120 patients) among them. Considering this, the sample size of 80 was determined and patients were selected by consecutive random sampling methods.

Study Procedure

Demographic data, the relevant clinical history (including >10% weight loss over six months) and examination, laboratory investigations including detailed CSF analysis, radiological imaging findings, and response to treatment including adverse drug reactions were documented in case sheets.

Scores were given based on clinical features, CSF, imaging findings, and extra-neural TB as per Marai’s Criteria and patients diagnosis was classified as definite TBM (demonstration of TB bacilli on smear, positive culture or CBNAAT or histological evidence), probable TBM (Total score >12) and possible TBM (total score between 9-11) (15).

Follow-up of the patients was done at three months and at six months intervals for documenting changes in clinical profile and response to treatment. Routine investigations were done in all patients at three months and six months intervals, and CD4 count was done at six months. MRI brain was repeated for all patients at three months or earlier if needed (if clinical deterioration).

The Adverse Drug Effects (ADE) of ATT and ART were documented based on clinical assessment and routine laboratory investigations. Relevant changes in treatment were made by the treating physician if drug-induced side-effects were noted, as per existing Revised National TB Control Programme (RNTCP) and NACO guidelines (12).

All the above-mentioned data were studied and compared between HIV positive and HIV negative groups. During follow-up, worsening of clinical features due to the development of hydrocephalus, vasculitis, new infarcts, and Immune Reconstitution Inflammatory Syndrome (IRIS) were noted. Paradoxical response to antitubercular therapy was treated with a short course of oral prednisolone (0.5 mg/kg) for two weeks and was gradually tapered off.

Statistical Analysis

The data was entered in Microsoft excel 2010 and was analysed using Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 2010. Qualitative variables were represented in the form of frequency tables and percentages, bar diagrams, pie charts, and quantitative data as mean and standard deviation. Association between two qualitative data was calculated using Chi-square test/Fisher-exact test and comparison of the mean of quantitative data between two groups was made using unpaired t-test. A p-value of less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results

During the study period, 80 patients of TBM were enrolled, 40 were HIV positive and 40 were HIV negative. The mean age of patients was 36.75 years (range 15-55 years) in HIV positive, whereas in HIV negative patients it was 29.35 years (range 14-65 years), suggesting the involvement of the younger population among non HIV patients. There was equal (M: F: 1:1) gender distribution among HIV patients, whereas females (70%) were more affected than males (30%) among non HIV patients (Table/Fig 1).

The most common symptom observed in HIV positive TBM patients was altered sensorium (90%) and in HIV negative patients it was weight loss (95%) besides common symptoms of meningitis observed in both the groups (Table/Fig 2). The most common sign observed in both groups was nuchal rigidity (88.8%), focal neurological deficit (36.3%), and Cranial nerve palsy (22.5%) which were commonly seen in HIV positive patients (Table/Fig 3). The most common cranial nerve involved were 6th CN followed by 3rd and 7th.

Majority (87.5%) of HIV positive patients were anaemic (mean Hb-11.2+SD 1.39) as compared to HIV negative patients (56.3%, mean Hb-11.06+SD 1.64) on presentation (Table/Fig 4),(Table/Fig 5). Out of 40 HIV positive TBM patients, 13 (32.5%) were started on ART after AKT initiation and 27 (67.5%) were already on ART before the start of the ATT regimen. Patients of HIV were on following ART regimen-Tenofovir+Lamvudine+ Efavirenz (80%), Zidovudine+Lamvudine+Nevirapine (15%) and Zidovudine+ Lamvudine+Efavirenz (5%). Liver enzymes {Serum Glutamic Oxaloacetic Transaminase (SGOT)} were raised in 20 (50%) HIV positive patients after starting treatment, out of which four were on ATT and 16 patients were on both. In non HIV TBM patients, SGOT was raised in 11 (27.5%) patients after starting on AKT. Raised {Serum Glutamic Pyruvic Transaminase (SGPT)} was found in 9 (22.5%) patients in HIV positive patients (1 was on ATT and 8 on both ART and ATT) and 2 (5%) patients in HIV negative group (p-value=0.023). All cases of suspected ART-induced hepatitis were asymptomatic and resolved without therapy modification. High creatinine was seen in 4 (10%) TBM patients with HIV (2 were on ATT and 2 on combined ATT and ART) and 2 (5%) patients with non HIV TBM (p-value=0.396) after starting treatment. This difference may be due to multiple risk factors causing AKI in HIV positive patients like HIV Associated Nephropathy (HIVAN), Anti-retroviral (Tenofovir), and anti-TB treatment (Rifampicin). Hyponatremia was found in 16 (40%) patients of HIV and 15 (37.5%) patients without HIV (p-value 0.818 NS). Another statistically significant laboratory abnormality observed was high ESR in HIV negative group (87.5%) compared to HIV positive group (25%), probably due to a better immune response in the former group (Table/Fig 4).

Most common abnormality in CT brain of TBM cases on admission was tuberculoma (22.5% in HIV positive and 35% in Non HIV) (Table/Fig 6). MRI Brain on admission showed tuberculoma in 32.5% (both groups), meningeal enhancement in 17.5% (12.5% in HIV & 22.5% in non HIV), vascular infarct in 17.5% (12.5% in HIV & 22.5% in non HIV), basal exudates in 17.5% (both group) and hydrocephalus in 15% (both groups).

On CSF analysis, total cell count was in the range of 10-500 cells/cmm (80% in HIV and 87.5% in Non HIV) along with lymphocyte predominance (>50%) was present in 83.8% of cases favouring a diagnosis of TBM. CSF proteins levels were raised (<1000 mg/dL) in 88.8% of cases; CSF glucose to plasma glucose ratio of less than 50% in 75% of cases and high adenosine deaminase (>5 IU/L) level in 87.5% (80% in HIV positive and 95% in HIV negative) especially in HIV negative patients were observed (Table/Fig 7).

Among 80 TBM patients, 22 (55%) survived in HIV co-infection and 26 (65%) survived in Non HIV with maximum mortality within the initial 6 months of diagnosis (Table/Fig 8). TBM with its complications (vasculitic infarct with hemiparesis, raised intracranial tension due to obstructive hydrocephalus) and tuberculoma was the most common cause of death in HIV positive (94.4%) as well as in HIV negative patients (64.2%). Other contributing causes of death included widespread disseminated TB (cervical lymphadenopathy, military spread, abdominal and spinal TB) as well as different comorbid conditions.

All symptoms/signs improved at 6 months follow-up in both groups except for 1 HIV positive patient who had a focal neurological deficit which was static (Table/Fig 9). At 3 month follow-up with MRI brain imaging, lesion improved in 14 (35%) patients in HIV positive patients and 18 (45%) HIV negative patients; whereas in 3 HIV positive cases it remained static and 2 HIV positive cases it worsened.

As per MARAIS criteria, 28 (70%) patients in HIV positive group and 25(62.5%) patients in HIV negative group were diagnosed as probable TBM whereas 12(30%) patients in HIV positive group and 15(37.5%) patients in HIV negative group were diagnosed as possible TBM (Table/Fig 10).

During follow-up 3(7.5%) patients in HIV positive group and 1(2.5%) patient in HIV negative group were found Multidrug-resistant TB proven on Cartridge-Based Nucleic Acid Amplification Test (GeneXpert or CB-NAAT) (Table/Fig 11).

Incidence of ADE due to ATT was noted in 22.5% of HIV positive patients and none in HIV negative at 6 month follow-up (Table/Fig 12); whereas ADE due to ART was seen in 10% of patients of HIV positive group at 6 month follow-up (Table/Fig 13).

Common adverse effects of ART noted in the study were rash (Efavirenz), headache, hepatitis (Efavirenz), nephritis (Tenofovir), nausea, giddiness, hyperlipidaemia, anaemia/pancytopenia (Zidovudine). In HIV patients common side-effects of ATT noted were hepatitis, AKI, and hypothyroidism, whereas in HIV negative patients it were hepatitis, hyperuricaemia, and flu-like syndrome. AKT was modified in cases of hepatitis (diagnosed after ruling out viral and other causes) to ethambutol, streptomycin, and fluoroquinolones till hepatitis resolved, and then sequentially AKT was started to find out the culprit drug which was excluded from the regimen. In the case of AKT-induced AKI, the regimen was modification as giving isoniazid, rifampicin daily (full dose), and pyrazinamide, and ethambutol (50% of dose) on an alternate day till AKI resolved.

Discussion

The TBM is one of the most severe clinical presentations of TB with very high mortality and morbidity, especially in immune-compromised patients. Despite advancements in diagnostic technologies, early diagnosis of TBM continues to be difficult. The usual practice for initiation of empirical treatment for TBM is still based on clinical features and CSF analysis findings. There is limited data of large series from developing countries regarding confirmed TBM (16).

In this study, there were enrolled 80 patients of TBM with and without HIV co-infection with 40 patients in each group. The purpose was to study the differences between the two groups in various clinical presentations, laboratory investigations, brain imaging findings, CSF analysis, course of the disease, and response to treatment during follow-up in various parameters. Our study has shown that the younger population is affected in both groups, especially in HIV negative patients. Similar findings were observed by Pehlivanoglu F et al., in Turkey where young adults aged 15-30 years have the highest incidence of TBM (16).

Clinical features showed that HIV positive patients had severe neurological manifestations like altered sensorium (p-value 0.045) and seizures (p-value 0.004). Similarly, cranial nerve palsy (p-value 0.001) and focal neurological deficit (p-value 0.01) were commonly seen in HIV positive patients. Marais S et al., conducted a retrospective study on 106 HIV-TBM co-infection patients and have shown that patients with advanced meningitis with more neurological symptoms have higher mortality compared to non HIV TBM patients. Also starting ART prior or during TB treatment improves the outcome in HIV patients (17).

In this study, 35 (87.5%) patients were found to be anaemic in HIV positive group (p-value 0.0001S) and 10 (25.0%) patients were anaemic in HIV negative group. Although we did not identify an association between anaemia and mortality, haemoglobin levels are a known risk factor for death in patients with HIV and TB infection. Haematocrit level is independently associated with death in HIV-TB co-infected patients (18),(19).

Liver enzymes were raised in HIV positive patients (SGOT-50%, SGPT-22.5% with a p-value of 0.039 and 0.023, respectively) in this study. This finding was similar to the study done by Netto I et al., in which mean serum Aspartate Transaminase (AST) and Alanine Transaminase (ALT) increased from 22.15±2.67 IU/L and 17.85±1.84 IU/L respectively, to up to 95.85±26.9 IU/L (p < 0.001) and 85.67±28.56 IU/L (p<0.001) in HIV positive patients (20). The increase was found to be statistically highly significant. The derangement in serum liver enzyme level may help us identify patients requiring further investigations, and can be use a prognostic tool in HIV (21).

Hyponatremia was found in 16 (40%) HIV positive patients and 15 (37.5%) non HIV patients (p-value of 0.818). According to Torok ME TBM can cause metabolic complications, especially hyponatremia, which affects >50% of patients with the disease despite normal concentrations of Antidiuretic Hormone (ADH), even though they haven’t ruled out the role of ADH (22). Another study done in Cambodia, on role of hyponatremia in diagnosis of Extra-Pulmonary Tuberculosis (EPTB) in HIV positive patients have shown that 57% of patients of EPTB had hyponatremia. This study showed that hyponatremia should be considered as marker for searching evidence of EPTB in an HIV patients (23). TBM-associated hyponatremia have low plasma volumes and persistent natriuresisas Cerebral Salt Wasting (CSW) is one of the commonest causes of hyponatremia beside Syndrome of Inappropriate Secretion of Antidiuretic Hormone (SIADH) (24).

Raised ESR was seen in 35 (87.5%) non HIV TBM patients (p-value 0.0001 S), whereas it was normal in 30 (75%) HIV-TBM patients. A study conducted in India by Sarkar K et al., in 2004, showed that HIV infected TB patients have lower ESR compared to HIV negative TB patients, and concluded that low ESR in TB patients may have an association with HIV infection and higher ESR may be protective towards HIV infection in resource-poor settings like India (25).

CT brain, done on admission, showed a majority of the HIV positive patients having tuberculoma (22.5%) and basal exudates (20%) and non HIV patients had meningeal enhancement (25%). Katrak SM et al., found that meningeal enhancement and obstructive hydrocephalus was not commonly seen in TBM patients with HIV infection probably due to reduced and atypical inflammatory response in them (7). HIV-infected individuals are also more likely to present with cerebral infarcts and mass lesions, and less likely to present with obstructive hydrocephalus (26). MRI brain on admission showed tuberculoma (32.5%) as the most common finding in both groups. MRI has better sensitivity and can show small abnormalities in both the brain and spine. Meningeal enhancement is better visualised because of the signal contrast between the inflamed meninges and the CSF, as well as infarction, and is useful for follow-up (27).

CSF ADA >5 favouring a diagnosis of TBM was present in 32(80%) patients in HIV positive group and 38(95%) patients in HIV negative group. Meta-analysis (13 studies with 380 patients of TBM) of ADA values (1 to 10 IU/L) in TBM cases and controls was done by Tuon FF et al., They have observed that ADA values from 1 to 4 U/l helped to exclude TBM; values between 4 and 8 U/l were insufficient to confirm or exclude the diagnosis of TBM, and values >8 U/l improved the diagnosis of TBM (28).

Survival of the patients at 6 months was better in the HIV negative (65%) group compared to HIV positive group (55%) in our study. In a retrospective study done by Maria’s et al., in Cape Town (SA) the incidence of 6-month mortality in HIV patients with TBM was 48% which was similar to our study (17). The incidence of MDR-TBM was high in HIV positive (7.5%) compared to Non HIV (2.5%) patients in our study. A study done in Korea by Lee S et al., showed the prevalence of 11.1% MDR-TBM in HIV patients and 8.2% in non HIV patients which was higher compared to our study (29).

Adverse effect of anti- TB treatment was found in 9(22.5%) patients in HIV positive group and none in HIV negative group (p-value 0.001 S). Shang M, An Y et al., have shown that drug-resistant TB, especially MDR-TB, was associated with long-term and complicated treatment, poor prognosis, and a severe sequel, and it also takes a huge toll on patients and medical workers (30).

The adverse effect of antiretroviral therapy was found in 4(10%) patients in HIV positive group in the present study. A study done by Lorío M et al., reported the incidence of ADEs due to ART to be around 6.2% (31).

Limitation(s)

This was a single-institution study; a multicentre study on similar lines in the future would support and fortify the findings observed in this study; shorter follow-up of 6 months. A large follow-up could result in better data with wider applications.

Conclusion

The HIV with TBM co-infection is associated with more severe clinical manifestations, abnormal laboratory parameters, very high incidences of complications and adverse drugs reactions to both AKT and ART as well as very high mortality. Early diagnosis and prompt initiation of treatment with anticipation of adverse events and their monitoring will ensure better management of such patients.

References

1.
Global tuberculosis report 2021. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2021.
2.
Web Annex 1. Key data at a glance. In: Global progress report on HIV, viral hepatitis and sexually transmitted infections, 2021.
3.
Aishwarya G, Sunil PB, Kamath P, Rakesh KB, Rathi P, Jagadish S et al. A pattern of opportunistic infections among HIV in patients on antiretroviral therapy in a tertiary care hospital in coastal Karnataka: A retrospective evaluation. International Journal of Research in Pharmaceutical Sciences. 2020;11(4):6385-90. [crossref]
4.
Karande S, Hupta V, Kulkarni M, Joshi A, Rele M. Tuberculous meningitis and HIV. Indian J Pediatr. 2005;72:755-60. [crossref] [PubMed]
5.
Schutte CM. Clinical, cerebrospinal fluid and pathological findings and outcomes in HIV-positive and HIV-negative patients with tuberculous meningitis. Infection. 2001;29:213-17. [crossref] [PubMed]
6.
El Sahly HM, Teetter LD, Pan X, Musser JM, Graviss EA. Mortality associated with central nervous system tuberculosis. J Infect. 2007;55:502-09. [crossref] [PubMed]
7.
Katrak SM, Shembalkar PK, Bijwe SR, Bhandarkar LD. The clinical, radiological and pathological profile of tuberculous meningitis in patients with and without human immunodeficiency virus infection. J Neurol Sci. 2000;181:118-26. [crossref]
8.
Puccioni-Sohler M, Brandao CO. Factors associated to the positive cerebrospinal fluid culture in the tuberculous meningitis. Arq Neuropsiquiatr. 2007;65:48-53. [crossref] [PubMed]
9.
Bossi P, Reverdy O, Caumes E, Mortier E, Meynard JL, Meyohas MC, et al. Tuberculous meningitis: clinical, biological and x-ray computed tomographic comparison between patients with or without HIV infection Presse Med. 1997;26:844-47.
10.
Yechoor VK, Shandera WX, Rodriguez P, Cate TR. Tuberculous meningitis among adults with and without HIV infection. Experience in an urban public hospital. Arch Intern Med. 1996;156:1710-16. [crossref] [PubMed]
11.
Dr Meg Doherty. 2021 WHO HIV clinical and service delivery recommendations. Department of Global HIV, Hepatitis and Sexually Transmitted Infection Programmes. WHO March2021.
12.
National Technical Guidelines on Anti-Retroviral Treatment. National AIDS Control Organization (NACO), Ministry of Health and Family Welfare Government of India. Oct 2018;1-229.
13.
Hurtado RM, Meressa D, Goldfeld AE. Treatment of drug-resistant tuberculosis among people living with HIV. CurrOpin HIV AIDS. 2018;13:478-85. [crossref] [PubMed]
14.
Zürcher K, Ballif M, Fenner L, Borrell S, Keller PM, Gnokoro J, et al. Drug susceptibility testing and mortality in patients treated for tuberculosis in high-burden countries: a multicentre cohort study. Lancet Infect Dis. 2019;19:298-307. [crossref]
15.
Marais S, Thwaites G, Schoeman JF, Török ME, Misra UK, Prasad K, et al. Tuberculous meningitis: a uniform case definition for use in clinical research. Lancet Infect Dis. 2010;10(11):803-12. [crossref]
16.
Pehlivanoglu F, Kart Yasar K, Sengoz G. Tuberculous Meningitis in adults: a review of 160 cases. Scientific World Journal. 2012;2012:169028. [crossref] [PubMed]
17.
Suzaan M, Pepper DJ, Schutz C, Wilkinson RJ, Meintjes G. Presentation and outcome of tuberculous meningitis in a high HIV prevalence setting. PloS one vol. 2011;6:20077. [crossref] [PubMed]
18.
Croda MG, Vidal JE, Hernández AV, Dal Molin T, Gualberto FA, de Oliveira AC. Tuberculous meningitis in HIV-infected patients in Brazil: clinical and laboratory characteristics and factors associated with mortality. Int J Infect Dis. 2010;14(7):586-91. [crossref] [PubMed]
19.
Obirikorang C, Yeboah FA. Blood haemoglobin measurement as a predictive indicator for the progression of HIV/AIDS in resource-limited setting. J Biomed Sci. 2009;16(1):102. [crossref] [PubMed]
20.
Netto I, Borgaonkar K, Lobo R. Aminotransferase profile in HIV positive patients. Indian J Sex Transm Dis. 2009;30(2):121. [crossref] [PubMed]
21.
Patil R, Raghuwanshi U. Aminotransferase profile in HIV positive patients. J Pure Appl Microbiol. 2010;4(1):263-66.
22.
Torok ME. Tuberculous meningitis: advances in diagnosis and treatment. Br Med Bull. 2015;113(1):117-31. [crossref] [PubMed]
23.
Lynen L, Phan S, Prey SP, Sopheak T, Harwell J, Boelaert M, et al. Does Hyponatremia have a value in the diagnosis of extrapulmonary tuberculosis in HIV-1 infected patients in cambodia? The Open Infectious Diseases Journal. 2007;1:1-3. [crossref]
24.
Misra UK, Kalita J. Mechanism, spectrum, consequences and management of hyponatremia in tuberculous meningitis. Wellcome Open Research. 2021;4:189. [crossref] [PubMed]
25.
Sarkar K, Baraily S, Dasgupta S, Bhattacharya SK. Erythrocyte sedimentation rate may be an indicator for screening of tuberculosis patients for underlying HIV infection, particularly in resource-poor settings: An experience from India. Journal of Health, Population and Nutrition. 2004;22:220-21.
26.
Vinnard C, MacGregor RR. Tuberculous meningitis in HIV-infected individuals. Curr HIV /AIDS Rep. 2009;6(3):139-45. [crossref] [PubMed]
27.
Abdelmalek R, Kanoun F, Kilani B, Tiouiri H, Zouiten F, Ghoubantini A, et al. Tuberculous meningitis in adults: MRI contribution to the diagnosis in 29 patients. Int J Infect Dis. 2006;10(5):372-77. [crossref] [PubMed]
28.
Tuon FF, Higashino HR, Lopes MI, Litvoc MN, Atomiya AN, Antonangelo L, et al. Adenosine deaminase and tuberculous meningitis-a systematic review with meta-analysis. Scand J Infect Dis.2010;42:198-207. [crossref] [PubMed]
29.
Lee S, Lee SH, Mok JH, , Lee SJ, Kim KH, Lee JE, et al. Is multi-drug resistant tuberculosis more prevalent in HIV-infected patients in Korea Yonsei Med J. 2016;57(6):1508-10. [crossref] [PubMed]
30.
Zhang J, Hu X, Hu X, Ye Y, Shang M, An Y, et al. Clinical features, outcomes and molecular profiles of drug resistance in tuberculous meningitis in non HIV patients. Sci Rep. 2016;6:19072. [crossref] [PubMed]
31.
Lorío M, Colasanti J, Moreira S, Gutierrez G, Quant C. Adverse drug reactions to antiretroviral therapy in HIV-infected patients at the largest public hospital in Nicaragua. Journal of the International Association of Providers of AIDS Care. 2014;13(5):466-70. [crossref] [PubMed]

DOI and Others

DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2022/51702.16336

Date of Submission: Aug 02, 2021
Date of Peer Review: Oct 30, 2021
Date of Acceptance: Jan 13, 2022
Date of Publishing: May 01, 2022

AUTHOR DECLARATION:
• Financial or Other Competing Interests: None
• Was Ethics Committee Approval obtained for this study? Yes
• Was informed consent obtained from the subjects involved in the study? Yes
• For any images presented appropriate consent has been obtained from the subjects. NA

PLAGIARISM CHECKING METHODS:
• Plagiarism X-checker: Aug 03, 2021
• Manual Googling: Dec 20, 2021
• iThenticate Software: Jan 12, 2022 (9%)


ETYMOLOGY: Author Origin

JCDR is now Monthly and more widely Indexed .
  • Emerging Sources Citation Index (Web of Science, thomsonreuters)
  • Index Copernicus ICV 2017: 134.54
  • Academic Search Complete Database
  • Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ)
  • Embase
  • EBSCOhost
  • Google Scholar
  • HINARI Access to Research in Health Programme
  • Indian Science Abstracts (ISA)
  • Journal seek Database
  • Google
  • Popline (reproductive health literature)
  • www.omnimedicalsearch.com