ArticleBMC infectious diseases2024
Targeted nanopore sequencing using clinical specimens for the rapid diagnosis of extrapulmonary tuberculosis.
Article in BMC infectious diseases, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Nanopore Sequencing in Mycobacterial Diagnostics: Clinical and Laboratory Roles of mNGS and tNGS.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Article
- Article
- Diagnostic Utility of Nanopore Sequencing for Tuberculous Serous Effusions.Infection and drug resistance · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe clinical presentation of extrapulmonary tuberculosis (EPTB) is atypical and it is easily confused with other diseases such as common infections, making prompt diagnosis a great challenge. This study aimed to evaluate the accuracy of targeted nanopore sequencing (TNS) in the diagnosis of EPTB. The diagnostic accuracy of TNS using different types of extrapulmonary specimens was also evaluated.
methodsWe reviewed the clinical data of patients with suspected EPTB for whom TNS was conducted and who were hospitalized at our center. The true positive, false positive, false negative, and true negative values were determined. Indices of diagnostic accuracy were computed, including sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and area under the curve (AUC) for TNS and acid-fast bacilli (AFB) culture, and compared with those from clinical diagnosis.
results149 patients were included in the analysis. The overall sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, and AUC of TNS for the diagnosis of EPTB were 86.4%, 87.5%, 97.3%, 55.3%, and 0.87, respectively. For diagnosis by AFB culture, these values were 25.6%, 100.0%, 100.0%, 20.5%, and 0.63, respectively. The most common specimens used were lymph node tissue, cerebrospinal fluid, pleural effusion, and pleural tissue. The diagnostic accuracy of TNS using all types of extrapulmonary specimens was good.
conclusionsTNS demonstrates good diagnostic accuracy in the rapid diagnosis of EPTB and this was true across different types of extrapulmonary specimens.
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.