ArticleInfection and drug resistance2023
Diagnosis of Chest Wall Tuberculosis Using Fine Needle Aspiration: A Single-Center Experience.
Article in Infection and drug resistance, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Exploring the accuracy of the Xpert MTB/RIF assay in detecting lymph node tuberculosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis.PloS one · 2025Pooled it
- Head and Neck Tuberculosis: A Rare Diagnosis and the Role of Surgical Biopsy and Histopathological Evaluation in Extrapulmonary Disease.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Value of ultrasound guided biopsy combined with XpertWorld journal of clinical cases · 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
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Minimally invasive diagnosis of chest wall tuberculosis remains a challenge. Fine needle aspiration (FNA) is a simple and safe method of sampling. However, previous studies have shown that conventional tuberculosis tests had poor diagnostic performance in the needle aspirates. With the popularization of molecular detection application, the value of FNA in the diagnosis of chest wall tuberculosis needs to be reevaluated. Methods: We retrospectively studied patients with suspected chest wall tuberculosis at admission who underwent FNA for diagnosis and reported the diagnostic efficacy of acid-fast bacilli smear, mycobacterial culture, cytology and Xpert MTB/RIF (GeneXpert) when testing FNA specimens. A composite reference standard (CRS) was used as the diagnostic gold standard for this study. Results: Among 89 included FNA specimens, acid-fast bacilli smear, mycobacterial culture, and GeneXpert were positive in 15 (16.85%), 23 (25.8%), and 61 (68.5%), respectively. Thirty-nine (43.8%) had cytologic features suggestive of tuberculosis. According to CRS, 75 (84.3%) cases were categorized as chest wall tuberculosis, 14 (15.7%) were not diagnosed with tuberculosis. Using CRS as the gold standard, acid-fast bacilli smear, mycobacterial culture, cytology and GeneXpert exhibited sensitivity of 20%, 30.7%, 52% and 81.3%, respectively. Specificity in these four tests was found to be 100%. Sensitivity of GeneXpert was significantly higher than that of smear, culture and cytology, Conclusion: GeneXpert achieved higher sensitivity as compared to cytology and conventional TB tests in the chest wall FNA specimens. The implementation of GeneXpert may increase the diagnostic efficacy of FNA in the diagnosis of chest wall TB.
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.