ArticleBMC infectious diseases2016
Evaluation of Xpert® MTB/RIF and Ustar EasyNAT™ TB IAD for diagnosis of tuberculous lymphadenitis of children in Tanzania: a prospective descriptive study.
Article in BMC infectious diseases, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 6 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
17 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 32 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy of Xpert in tuberculosis diagnosis based on various specimens: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2023Pooled 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
- Xpert MTB/RIF and Xpert MTB/RIF Ultra assays for active tuberculosis and rifampicin resistance in children.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2020Pooled it
- Xpert MTB/RIF assay for diagnosis of extrapulmonary tuberculosis in children: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC infectious diseases · 2020Pooled it
- Diagnostic Accuracy of the Xpert MTB/RIF Assay for Lymph Node Tuberculosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.BioMed research international · 2019Pooled it
- XpertThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018Pooled it
- Improved detection of Mycobacterium tuberculosis in lymph node aspirates through GeneXpert MTB/RIF assay in Bangladesh.BMC infectious diseases · 2026Article
- Value of ultrasound‑guided puncture combined with GeneXpert MTB/RIF technology in the diagnosis of pleural tuberculosis.Experimental and therapeutic medicine · 2025Article
- Development of a Multiplex Real-Time PCR for Diagnosis of Tuberculosis and Multidrug Resistance.Current microbiology · 2025Article
- Xpert MTB/RIF Assay for the Diagnosis of Lymph Node Tuberculosis in Children: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Review
- EasyNAT MTC assay: A simple, rapid, and low-cost cross-priming amplification method for the detection of mycobacterium tuberculosis suitable for point-of-care testing.Emerging microbes & infections · 2021Article
- The yield of Auramine O staining using led microscopy with bleach treated sputum samples for detection of pulmonary tuberculosis at St. Peter tuberculosis specialized hospital, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.Journal of clinical tuberculosis and other mycobacterial diseases · 2020Article
- Evaluation of Xpert MTB/RIF for the Diagnosis of Lymphatic Tuberculosis.BioMed research international · 2020Article
- The use of Gene-Xpert MTB RIF in the diagnosis of extrapulmonary tuberculosis in childhood and adolescence.Revista da Sociedade Brasileira de Medicina Tropical · 2020Article
- A scoping review on the field validation and implementation of rapid diagnostic tests for vector-borne and other infectious diseases of poverty in urban areas.Infectious diseases of poverty · 2018Article
- Evaluation of the VITEK MS knowledge base version 3.0 for the identification of clinically relevant Mycobacterium species.Emerging microbes & infections · 2018Article
- Rapid molecular assays for detection of tuberculosis.Pneumonia (Nathan Qld.) · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFine needle aspiration biopsy has become a standard approach for diagnosis of peripheral tuberculous lymphadenitis. The aim of this study was to compare the performance of Xpert MTB/RIF and Ustar EasyNAT TB IAD nucleic acid amplification assays, against acid-fast bacilli microscopy, cytology and mycobacterial culture for the diagnosis of TB lymphadenitis in children from a TB-endemic setting in Tanzania.
methodsChildren of 8 weeks to 16 years of age, suspected of having TB lymphadenitis, were recruited at a district hospital in Tanzania. Fine needle aspirates of lymph nodes were analysed using acid-fast bacilli microscopy, liquid TB culture, cytology, Xpert MTB/RIF and EasyNAT. Latent class analysis and comparison against a composite reference standard comprising "culture and/or cytology" was done, to assess the performance of Xpert MTB/RIF and EasyNAT for the diagnosis of TB lymphadenitis.
resultsSeventy-nine children were recruited; 4 were excluded from analysis. Against a composite reference standard of culture and/or cytology, Xpert MTB/RIF and EasyNAT had a sensitivity and specificity of 58 % and 93 %; and 19 % and 100 % respectively. Relative to latent class definitions, cytology had a sensitivity of 100 % and specificity of 94.7 %.
conclusionsCombining clinical assessment, cytology and Xpert MTB/RIF may allow for a rapid and accurate diagnosis of childhood TB lymphadenitis. Larger diagnostic evaluation studies are recommended to validate these findings and on Xpert MTB/RIF to assess its use as a solitary initial test for TB lymphadenitis in children.
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.