ArticleInfection2019
GeneXpert of stool versus gastric lavage fluid for the diagnosis of pulmonary tuberculosis in severely ill adults.
Article in Infection, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diagnostic accuracy of stool Xpert MTB/RIF assay for adult pulmonary tuberculosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC infectious diseases · 2026Pooled it
- Stool specimen for diagnosis of pulmonary tuberculosis in adults: a systematic review.BMJ open · 2023Pooled it
- Correlation between Sputum Bacterial Culture Positive Rate and Drug Sensitivity Test Results and Disease Severity inInpatients and Its Clinical Significance: A SystematicReview and Meta-Analysis.Computational intelligence and neuroscience · 2022Pooled it
- Performance of stool-based Xpert MTB/RIF assay in the diagnosis of presumptive pulmonary tuberculosis in adults unable to expectorate sputum.Microbiology spectrum · 2025Article
- Performance of a stool-based quantitative PCR assay for the diagnosis of tuberculosis in adolescents and adults: a multinational, prospective diagnostic accuracy study.The Lancet. Microbe · 2024Article
- Yield & accuracy of Gastric Lavage in non-expectorating adults with Suspected Pulmonary Tuberculosis.Pakistan journal of medical sciencesArticle
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeStool is an alternative specimen matrix for tuberculosis (TB) tests, because Mycobacterium tuberculosis (MTB) can be swallowed and detected in the samples from digestive tract. We aimed to assess the performance of GeneXpert on stool and gastric lavage fluid (GALF) in diagnosing TB among patients with severe pulmonary TB.
methodsWe enrolled adults with suspected pulmonary TB who were unable to produce sputum at visit between January 2016 and June 2018. Bacteriological samples consisted of one transtracheal aspirate sputum specimen, one stool specimen and/or one gastric lavage fluid specimen. Bacterial culture of transtracheal aspirate sputum provided the gold standard.
resultsOf 65 individuals recruited for analysis, MGIT culture identified the presence of MTB in 32 samples. Overall, 29 of 32 stool samples from culture-positive cases were detected by the GeneXpert test, demonstrating a sensitivity of 90.6%. For GALF, 13 patients were detected as infected with MTB by GeneXpert, yielding a sensitivity of 56.5%. The statistical analysis revealed that GeneXpert showed significantly better sensitivity in detecting MTB from stool samples than GALF samples (P = 0.003). Among individuals with GeneXpert-positive stool, the percentage of individuals with comorbid diabetes was significantly higher than among individuals with GeneXpert-negative stool (19.4% vs. 2.9%, P = 0.034).
conclusionsIn conclusion, our data reveal that GeneXpert provides a higher detection rate on stool compared to GALF, indicating stool should be considered as an alternative for adult TB patients unable to produce sputum. Individuals with diabetes are more likely to have positive GeneXpert stool than nondiabetic individuals.
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.