SynthesisBMC infectious diseases2004
Nucleic acid amplification tests in the diagnosis of tuberculous pleuritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC infectious diseases, 2004. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 64 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
64 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 242 citations in OpenAlex.
- Low-complexity automated nucleic acid amplification tests for extrapulmonary tuberculosis and rifampicin resistance in adults and adolescents.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025Pooled it
- Xpert MTB/RIF Ultra and Xpert MTB/RIF assays for extrapulmonary tuberculosis and rifampicin resistance in adults.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021Pooled it
- Diagnostic accuracy of the Xpert MTB/RIF assay for tuberculous pericarditis: A systematic review and meta-analysis.PloS one · 2021Pooled it
- Diagnostic accuracy of in-house real-time PCR assay for Mycobacterium tuberculosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC infectious diseases · 2019Pooled it
- XpertThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018Pooled it
- Pooled it
- In-house nucleic acid amplification tests for the detection of Mycobacterium tuberculosis in sputum specimens: meta-analysis and meta-regression.BMC microbiology · 2005Pooled it
- Trial
- An Integrated Review of Conventional and Emerging Diagnostic and Therapeutic Modalities to Reduce the Risk of Surgical Resections in Intestinal Tuberculosis.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Tuberculous pleural effusion: integrating thoracic ultrasound and medical thoracoscopy in the diagnosis and management: a pictorial narrative review and an algorithm proposal.Journal of ultrasound · 2026Review
- Primary Effusion Lymphoma-like Lymphoma Mimicking Tuberculous Pleural Effusion: Three Case Reports and a Literature Review.Internal medicine (Tokyo, Japan) · 2023Review
- Evaluation of Xpert MTB/RIF assay for the diagnosis of extrapulmonary tuberculosis in Southwest China.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2023Article
- Estimating sensitivity and specificity of diagnostic tests using latent class models that account for conditional dependence between tests: a simulation study.BMC medical research methodology · 2023Article
- The value of interleukin-27 for differentiating tuberculous pleural effusion fromFrontiers in pediatrics · 2022Article
- A case of immunoglobulin G4-Related disease with pleural effusion, requiring exclusion of tuberculous pleurisy.Respiratory medicine case reports · 2022Article
- The diagnostic impact of implementing a molecular-based algorithm to standard mycobacterial screening at a reference laboratory with an intermediate prevalence for non-respiratory samples.Saudi journal of biological sciences · 2021Article
- Adenosine deaminase negative pleural tuberculosis: a case report.BMC infectious diseases · 2021Article
- The diagnostic utility of pleural markers for tuberculosis pleural effusion.Annals of translational medicine · 2020Review
- Diagnostic performance of nucleic acid tests in tuberculous pleurisy.BMC infectious diseases · 2020Article
- XpertAfrican journal of laboratory medicine · 2019Article
4 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundConventional tests for tuberculous pleuritis have several limitations. A variety of new, rapid tests such as nucleic acid amplification tests--including polymerase chain reaction--have been evaluated in recent times. We conducted a systematic review to determine the accuracy of nucleic acid amplification (NAA) tests in the diagnosis of tuberculous pleuritis.
methodsA systematic review and meta-analysis of 38 English and Spanish articles (with 40 studies), identified via searches of six electronic databases, hand searching of selected journals, and contact with authors, experts, and test manufacturers. Sensitivity, specificity, and other measures of accuracy were pooled using random effects models. Summary receiver operating characteristic curves were used to summarize overall test performance. Heterogeneity in study results was formally explored using subgroup analyses.
resultsOf the 40 studies included, 26 used in-house ("home-brew") tests, and 14 used commercial tests. Commercial tests had a low overall sensitivity (0.62; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.43, 0.77), and high specificity (0.98; 95% CI 0.96, 0.98). The positive and negative likelihood ratios for commercial tests were 25.4 (95% CI 16.2, 40.0) and 0.40 (95% CI 0.24, 0.67), respectively. All commercial tests had consistently high specificity estimates; the sensitivity estimates, however, were heterogeneous across studies. With the in-house tests, both sensitivity and specificity estimates were significantly heterogeneous. Clinically meaningful summary estimates could not be determined for in-house tests.
conclusionsOur results suggest that commercial NAA tests may have a potential role in confirming (ruling in) tuberculous pleuritis. However, these tests have low and variable sensitivity and, therefore, may not be useful in excluding (ruling out) the disease. NAA test results, therefore, cannot replace conventional tests; they need to be interpreted in parallel with clinical findings and results of conventional tests. The accuracy of in-house nucleic acid amplification tests is poorly defined because of heterogeneity in study results. The clinical applicability of in-house NAA tests remains unclear.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.