Evidence map›Paper›PMID 11724858›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2001

Evaluation of BACTEC Mycobacteria Growth Indicator Tube (MGIT 960) automated system for drug susceptibility testing of Mycobacterium tuberculosis.

F Ardito, B Posteraro, M Sanguinetti, S Zanetti, G Fadda

Abstract readComparative StudyEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 2001. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 58 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
58citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

58 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Clinical management of XpertBMC infectious diseases · 2026
    Observational
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Multi-drug resistant gene mutation analysis inIranian journal of microbiology · 2024
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Tuberculosis/COVID-19 co-infection detected in a single sputum sample using a rapid molecular test.Brazilian journal of microbiology : [publication of the Brazilian Society for Microbiology] · 2022
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Drug resistantPeerJ · 2022
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Revisiting the methods for detectingAccess microbiology · 2021
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

F ArditoIstituto di Microbiologia, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy.
B Posteraro
M Sanguinetti
S Zanetti
G Fadda

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The reliability of the BACTEC MGIT 960 system, an automated version of the Mycobacteria Growth Indicator Tube (MGIT), for antimicrobial susceptibility testing of Mycobacterium tuberculosis was evaluated on 78 clinical isolates. Rifampin (RMP), isoniazid (INH), streptomycin (SM), and ethambutol (EMB) were tested at the following concentrations: 1.0 microg/ml for RMP, 0.1 and 0.4 microg/ml for INH, 1.0 and 4.0 microg/ml for SM, and 5.0 and 7.5 microg/ml for EMB. Results were compared with those obtained by the BACTEC 460 TB radiometric system. Initially the reproducibility study showed 99.5% agreement on repeat testing with all the four drugs. With susceptibility testing of clinical isolates, excellent agreement between the two systems was found for all the drugs. A total of nine major errors were observed for only three isolates, resistant according to BACTEC MGIT 960 and susceptible according to BACTEC 460 TB, to SM (4.0 microg/ml), INH (0.1 microg/ml), and EMB (5.0 microg/ml) (one isolate) and to SM (1.0 microg/ml), INH (0.4 microg/ml), and EMB (5.0 microg/ml) (two isolates). When these isolates were tested by using the conventional proportion method on Löwenstein-Jensen medium, agreement with BACTEC MGIT 960 was found for five results and with BACTEC 460 TB for the remainder. The time to report results was 7.9 days by MGIT 960 and 7.3 days by BACTEC 460 TB, which was not found statistically significant (P > 0.05). In conclusion, the performance of BACTEC MGIT 960 was found similar to that of BACTEC 460 TB and this new system can be considered a good alternative to the radiometric method for routine susceptibility testing of M. tuberculosis.

Indexed as

Reagent Kits, DiagnosticAntitubercular AgentsBacteriological TechniquesCulture MediaHumansMicrobial Sensitivity TestsMycobacterium tuberculosisReproducibility of ResultsSensitivity and SpecificityTuberculosisAntitubercular AgentsCulture MediaReagent Kits, Diagnostic

Identifiers

PMID11724858
PMCPMC88562

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.