ArticleJournal of maxillofacial and oral surgery2023
An Analysis of Xpert Test for Diagnosing Maxillofacial Tuberculosis.
Article in Journal of maxillofacial and oral surgery, 2023. 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, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
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
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Maxillofacial tuberculosis is a diagnostic challenge for surgeons. The aim of this study was to present a detailed analysis of Xpert test in diagnosing maxillofacial tuberculosis and to analyse the accuracy of Xpert test results for various tissues of maxillofacial region. Materials and Methods: In this cross-sectional study, patients were selected randomly from outpatient department. The patients who had clinical picture and differential diagnosis highly suggestive of maxillofacial tuberculosis were included. Patients were divided into three different groups depending upon the site of involvement. The samples collected from the patients were further subdivided depending upon the type of specimen. Patients were screened first by routine tests, and the negative cases were followed by Xpert test for tuberculosis. Results: A total of 54 patients were enrolled in the study, 13 patients were found to be positive for maxillofacial tuberculosis on routine screening tests for tuberculosis, and 41 tested negative on routine test and were evaluated further through Xpert test. Specimens from bone ( Conclusion: Xpert test is more accurate when compared to routine test for diagnosing maxillofacial tuberculosis. Although accuracy of Xpert test is better for pus and biopsy samples in the specimens from bone and soft tissue, it gives poor accuracy for aspirated cells. The aspirates from lymph nodes were more susceptible for false negative test.
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.