ArticleEmerging microbes & infections2023
Accuracy of Xpert® MTB/RIF Ultra test for posterior oropharyngeal saliva for the diagnosis of paucibacillary pulmonary tuberculosis: a prospective multicenter study.
Article in Emerging microbes & infections, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diagnostic accuracy of Xpert MTB/RIF Ultra for detecting pulmonary tuberculosis and rifampicin resistance: a systematic review and meta-analysis.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2025Pooled it
- Diagnostic Accuracy of Molecular Testing on Saliva and Oral Swabs for Pulmonary Tuberculosis.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2026Article
- A diagnostic performance study of multiplex polymerase chain reaction-based targeted next-generation sequencing for the accurate identification ofFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2026Article
- Xpert MTB/RIF Ultra performance on bronchial specimens in diagnosing pulmonary tuberculosis in Vancouver, Canada.Journal of medical microbiology · 2025Article
- The Role of Salivary Diagnostic Techniques in Screening for Active Pulmonary Tuberculosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Microorganisms · 2025Review
- Rapid quantitative PCR on tongue swabs for pulmonary tuberculosis in adults: a prospective multicentre study.The European respiratory journal · 2025Article
- Non-sputum-based samples and biomarkers for detection of Mycobacterium tuberculosis: the hope to improve childhood and HIV-associated tuberculosis diagnosis.European journal of medical research · 2024Review
- Detection of Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex in saliva by quantitative PCR: A potential alternative specimen for pulmonary tuberculosis diagnosis.Tuberculosis (Edinburgh, Scotland) · 2024Article
- Advancing tuberculosis diagnosis and management in cynomolgus macaques using Xpert MTB/RIF ultra assay.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Development and preliminary assessment of a CRISPR-Cas12a-based multiplex detection ofFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPosterior oropharyngeal saliva (POS) is increasingly recognized as an alternative specimen for detecting respiratory pathogens. The accuracy of Xpert® MTB/RIF Ultra (X-Ultra), when performed on POS obtained from patients with paucibacillary pulmonary tuberculosis (TB) is unclear.
methodsWe consecutively recruited adults with symptoms suggestive of pulmonary TB who were negative by both smear microscopy and Xpert MTB/RIF (X-Classic). Each participant was required to provide one bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BALF) and one POS specimen, respectively. Diagnostic performances of X-Ultra and X-Classic on POS were compared against clinical and mycobacterial reference standards.
findings686 participants meeting inclusion criteria were consecutively enrolled into the study. The overall diagnostic sensitivities of X-Ultra and X-Classic on POS samples were 78.9% [95% confidence interval (CI): 72.8-83.8] and 56.4% (95% CI: 49.7-62.9), respectively; the specificities were 96.6% (95% CI: 94.3-98.1) for X-Ultra and 97.6 (95CI: 95.5-98.8) for X-Classic in POS specimens. Notably, the sensitivity of X-Ultra on POS was as sensitive as X-Classic on BALF against microbiological reference standard (78.9% VS 73.1%). Against clinical diagnosis as a reference standard, the sensitivities of X-Ultra and X-Classic on POS were 55.9% (95% CI: 50.5-61.2; 193/345) and 40.0% (95% CI: 34.8-45.4; 138/345), respectively. The risk of negative results with POS was dramatically increased with decreasing bacterial loads.
conclusionsThe testing of POS using X-Ultra shows promise as a tool to identify patients with paucibacillary TB. Considering that bronchoscopy is a semi-invasive procedure, POS testing ahead of bronchoscopy, may decrease the need for bronchoscopic procedures, and the cost of care.
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.