ArticleThe Journal of international medical research2020
Performance of the Xpert® MTB/RIF assay in the rapid diagnosis of tracheobronchial tuberculosis using bronchial washing fluid.
Article in The Journal of international medical research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo assess the diagnostic value of the Xpert® MTB/RIF (GeneXpert) assay for tracheobronchial tuberculosis (TBTB) using bronchial washing fluid (BWF).
methodsThis retrospective study enrolled patients suspected of having TBTB and patients with non-TB pulmonary disease as controls. BWF were used to undertake acid-fast bacillus (AFB) smears, the GeneXpert assay and the Lӧwenstein-Jensen (LJ) culture method. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) were compared among BWF AFB smears, BWF GeneXpert and the BWF LJ culture method.
resultsA total of 130 patients with TBTB and 102 patients with non-TB pulmonary disease were enrolled in the study. Sputum AFB smears were positive in 62 of 130 patients (47.7%) with TBTB. Using the clinical diagnosis of TBTB as the gold standard, the sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV of the three methods using BWF were as follows: 93.1%, 99.0%, 99.2% and 91.8% for BWF GeneXpert; 73.1%, 100.0%, 100.0% and 74.5% for BWF LJ cultures; 53.8%, 99.0%, 98.6% and 62.7% for BWF AFB smears. The diagnostic yield of BWF GeneXpert was significantly higher compared with BWF cultures for type III and IV TBTB.
conclusionThe Xpert® MTB/RIF assay using BWF exhibited higher sensitivity than bacteriological diagnostic methods and was particularly useful for the early diagnosis of smear-negative TBTB.
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.