ArticleAnnals of neurosciences2010
Diagnostic efficacy of adenosine deaminase levels in cerebrospinal fluid in patients of tubercular meningitis: A comparison with PCR for Mycobacterium Tuberculosis.
Article in Annals of neurosciences, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It has been retracted, and should not be counted. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diagnostic challenges in tuberculous meningitis: a case report with negative genexpert result.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2023Article
- Immunoglobulin G4 (IgG4)-Related Hypophysitis.Endocrine pathology · 2017Article
- Expression of Concern.Annals of neurosciences · 2015Article
- Abducens nerve palsy and meningitis by Rickettsia typhi.The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene · 2015Article
- Diagnostic accuracy of cerebrospinal fluid adenosine deaminase in detecting Tuberculous Meningitis.Pakistan journal of medical sciencesArticle
Corrections and comments
- Retraction · 2018-12-13Duplication of/in Article · Investigation by Journal/Publisher ·
- Expression of concern · 2015-10-01Concerns/Issues about Authorship/Affiliation · Concerns/Issues about Data · Investigation by Journal/Publisher ·
- Expression of concern
- Retracted
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe rapid diagnosis of Tubercular meningitis (TBM) is fundamental to clinical outcome. The key to diagnosis lies in Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) analysis and radiological investigations. There are numerous lacunae in the confirmation of diagnosis of TBM from CSF. PURPOSE: The aim of present study was to compare the efficacy of CSF adenosine deaminase (ADA) level assays and Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) for Mycobacterium tuberculosis (M. tuberculosis) in the diagnosis of TBM.
methodsFifty four adult patients with suspected TBM and 37 controls were included in the study and CSF analyzed for ADA and PCR for M. tuberculosis. The cases were subdivided into definite (5), highly probable (22), probable (22) and possible TBM (5) as per previously validated criteria. The first two were grouped as "most likely" TBM (27) and last two as "unconfirmed" TBM (27).
resultsThe mean ADA of the "most likely" TBM was 29±24, "unconfirmed" TBM was 21 ± 15 and controls were 4.8±2.2 U/L. The ADA levels correlated with CSF proteins, absolute lymphocyte count and the staging of the disease. Using a cut off level of >L10 U/L, CSF ADA had a sensitivity of 92.5% and specificity of 97%. PCR for M. tuberculosis was positive in 12 out of 27 "most likely" TBM cases, 5 out of 27 "unconfirmed" TBM cases and 3 out of 37 controls. PCR for M. tuberculosis had a sensitivity of 44.5% and specificity of 92% in the "most likely" TBM cases.
conclusionsADA is a rapid, inexpensive and sensitive test in the diagnosis of TBM. It is more sensitive than AFB smear and culture. PCR is another rapid test in the diagnosis of TBM with a good specificity, even in those patients already on presumptive anti-tuberculous treatment. However, despite the sensitivity and specificity of CSF ADA, it should be corroborated with AFB smear and CSF PCR.
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.