ArticleBMC infectious diseases2010
Field test of a novel detection device for Mycobacterium tuberculosis antigen in cough.
Article in BMC infectious diseases, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 50 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diagnostic Accuracy of Breath Tests to Detect Pulmonary Tuberculosis: A Systematic Review.Lung · 2025Pooled it
- Diagnosis of tuberculosis through breath test: A systematic review.EBioMedicine · 2019Pooled it
- Non-sputum-based samples and biomarkers for detection of Mycobacterium tuberculosis: the hope to improve childhood and HIV-associated tuberculosis diagnosis.European journal of medical research · 2024Review
- Blazing the trail for innovative tuberculosis diagnostics.Infection · 2024Review
- Evolution of tuberculosis diagnostics: From molecular strategies to nanodiagnostics.Tuberculosis (Edinburgh, Scotland) · 2023Review
- Tuberculosis Treatment Monitoring and Outcome Measures: New Interest and New Strategies.Clinical microbiology reviews · 2022Review
- Breath-Based Diagnosis of Infectious Diseases: A Review of the Current Landscape.Clinics in laboratory medicine · 2021Review
- Breath can discriminate tuberculosis from other lower respiratory illness in children.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Advances in tuberculosis diagnostics: the Xpert MTB/RIF assay and future prospects for a point-of-care test.The Lancet. Infectious diseases · 2013Review
- Reporter phage and breath tests: emerging phenotypic assays for diagnosing active tuberculosis, antibiotic resistance, and treatment efficacy.The Journal of infectious diseases · 2011Review
- Towards a point-of-care test for active tuberculosis: obstacles and opportunities.Nature reviews. Microbiology · 2011Review
- Point-of-care assays for tuberculosis: role of nanotechnology/microfluidics.Biotechnology advancesReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTuberculosis is a highly infectious disease that is spread from person to person by infected aerosols emitted by patients with respiratory forms of the disease. We describe a novel device that utilizes immunosensor and bio-optical technology to detect M. tuberculosis antigen (Ag85B) in cough and demonstrate its use under field conditions during a pilot study in an area of high TB incidence.
methodsThe TB Breathalyzer device (Rapid Biosensor Systems Ltd) was field tested in the outpatient clinic of Adama Hospital, Ethiopia. Adults seeking diagnosis for respiratory complaints were tested. Following nebulization with 0.9% saline patients were asked to cough into a disposable collection device where cough aerosols were deposited. Devices were then inserted into a portable instrument to assess whether antigen was present in the sample. Demographic and clinical data were recorded and all patients were subjected to chest radiogram and examination of sputum by Ziehl-Nielsen microscopy. In the absence of culture treatment decisions were based on smear microscopy, chest x-ray and clinical assessment. Breathalyzer testing was undertaken by a separate physician to triage and diagnostic assessment.
resultsSixty individuals were each subjected to a breathalyzer test. The procedure was well tolerated and for each patient the testing was completed in less than 10 min. Positive breath test results were recorded for 29 (48%) patients. Of 31 patients with a diagnosis of tuberculosis 23 (74%; 95% CI 55-87) were found positive for antigen in their breath and 20 (64%; 95% CI 45-80) were smear positive for acid fast bacilli in their sputum. Six patients provided apparent false positive breathalyzer results that did not correlate with a diagnosis of tuberculosis.
conclusionsWe propose that the breathalyzer device described warrants further investigation as a tool for studying exhalation of M. tuberculosis. The portability, simplicity of use and speed of the test device suggest it may also find use as a tool to aid early identification of infectious cases. We recommend studies be undertaken to determine the diagnostic sensitivity and specificity of the device when compared to microbiological and clinical indicators of tuberculosis disease.
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.