ArticleFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology2019
The Performance of Pleural Fluid T-SPOT.TB Assay for Diagnosing Tuberculous Pleurisy in China: A Two-Center Prospective Cohort Study.
Article in Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 3 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 24 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Diagnostic Value of T-SPOT.TB Assay for Tuberculous Peritonitis: A Meta-Analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2020Pooled it
- Diagnostic Accuracy of T-SPOT.TB Assay for Tuberculous Meningitis: An Updated Meta-Analysis.Frontiers in neurology · 2020Pooled it
- Advances in technology for the laboratory diagnosis of individuals with HIV/AIDS coinfected withBiosafety and health · 2024Review
- Comparison of Performances of GeneXpert MTB/RIF, Bactec MGIT 960, and Bactec Myco/F Systems in Detecting Mycobacterium tuberculosis in Biopsy Tissues: a Retrospective Study.Microbiology spectrum · 2023Article
- Diagnostic Value of CD25, CD69, and CD134 on Tuberculosis-Specific Antigen-Stimulated CD4+ T Cells for Tuberculous Pleurisy.Journal of immunology research · 2023Article
- Review and Updates on the Diagnosis of Tuberculosis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Review
- Global trends of research on tuberculous pleurisy over the past 15 years: A bibliometric analysis.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2022Article
- Diagnostic Model for Discrimination Between Tuberculous Meningitis and Bacterial Meningitis.Frontiers in immunology · 2021Article
- Secreted Rv1768 From RD14 ofFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 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
9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The performance of T-SPOT.TB (T-SPOT) assay in diagnosing pleural tuberculosis (plTB) is inconsistent. In this study, we compared the performance of peripheral blood (PB) and pleural fluid (PF) T-SPOT assay in diagnosing plTB. Between July 2017 and March 2018, 218 and 210 suspected plTB patients were prospectively enrolled from Wuhan (training) and Guangzhou (validation) cohort, respectively. PB T-SPOT, PF T-SPOT, and other conventional tests were simultaneously performed. Our data showed the performance of PB T-SPOT in diagnosing plTB was limited, especially with low sensitivity. However, the results of early secreted antigenic target 6 (ESAT-6) and culture filtrate protein 10 (CFP-10) in PF T-SPOT were significantly increased compared with those in PB T-SPOT in plTB patients. If using 76 as the cutoff value of MAX (the larger of ESAT-6 and CFP-10) in Wuhan cohort, the sensitivity and specificity of PF T-SPOT to diagnose plTB were 89.76 and 96.70%, respectively. The diagnostic accuracy of PF T-SPOT was better than other routine tests such as pathogen detection methods and biochemical markers. The diagnostic accuracy of PF T-SPOT in Guangzhou cohort was similar to that in Wuhan cohort, with a sensitivity and specificity of 91.07 and 94.90%, respectively. Furthermore, CD4
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.