ArticleJournal of clinical laboratory analysis2019
Direct detection from clinical sputum samples to differentiate live and dead Mycobacterium Tuberculosis.
Article in Journal of clinical laboratory analysis, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Subtracting the background by reducing cell-free DNA's confounding effects on Mycobacterium tuberculosis quantitation and the sputum microbiome.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Comparison of microscopic and xpert MTB diagnoses of presumptive mycobacteria tuberculosis infection: retrospective analysis of routine diagnosis at Cape Coast Teaching Hospital.BMC infectious diseases · 2024Article
- Optimization and Testing of a Commercial Viability PCR Protocol to DetectMicroorganisms · 2024Article
- Identification and quantification of viableFrontiers in microbiology · 2024Article
- A Novel Propidium Monoazide-Based PCR Assay Can Measure Viable UropathogenicFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2022Article
- Detection ofFrontiers in veterinary science · 2022Article
- Recovery of Mycobacteria from Heavily Contaminated Environmental Matrices.Microorganisms · 2021Article
- Key Factors for Removing Bias in Viability PCR-Based Methods: A Review.Current microbiology · 2020Review
- An aptasensor for the detection of Mycobacterium tuberculosis secreted immunogenic protein MPT64 in clinical samples towards tuberculosis detection.Scientific reports · 2019Article
- New insights into the kinetics of bacterial growth and decay in pig manure-wheat straw aerobic composting based on an optimized PMA-qPCR method.Microbial biotechnology · 2019Article
- Direct detection from clinical sputum samples to differentiate live and dead Mycobacterium Tuberculosis.Journal of clinical laboratory analysis · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundIn this study, we aimed to optimize the condition of propidium monoazide (PMA) treatment for direct detection of Mycobacterium tuberculosis (MTB) from clinical specimens.
methodsThe light exposure time, dark incubation time, bacterial load, and PMA concentration were varied to determine the optimal condition of PMA treatment.
resultsOverall, the maximum ΔCq value was observed in the group receiving a light exposure time of 20 minutes, which was significantly higher than the others (P < 0.05). The prolongation of dark incubation time seemed more likely to result in greater ΔCq value, and the ΔCq values were 2.0, 4.1, 6.5, 10.1, and 12.7 cycles under dark incubation time of 10, 20, 40, 60, and 120 minutes, respectively. Alternatively, the 4+ samples exhibited favorable detection results at the application of 10
conclusionswe develop an acceptable method to directly identify the live bacteria from sputum samples. Our data demonstrate that the dark incubation plays a crucial role in the efficacy of PMA treatment for MTB.
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.