ReviewCureus2025
Performance of Various Pelvic-Derived Samples for the Diagnosis of Female Genital Tract Tuberculosis by Conventional and Molecular Methods: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Review
- Cervical Tuberculosis in the Postmenopausal Period: A Case of Mistaken Identity With Carcinoma.Cureus · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Female genital tuberculosis (FGTB) is a challenging extrapulmonary manifestation of tuberculosis, often presenting with nonspecific symptoms and a paucibacillary profile, complicating diagnosis. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the diagnostic performance of various pelvic-derived samples using conventional and molecular tests. A comprehensive literature search was conducted across multiple databases from inception up to August 2024, following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Studies assessing the sensitivity, specificity, or positivity rates of tests such as Ziehl-Neelsen (ZN) staining, culture, histopathology, polymerase chain reaction (PCR), and GeneXpert MTB/RIF on samples including endometrial biopsy, aspirates, menstrual blood, and peritoneal fluid were included. Meta-analysis using bivariate random-effects models was undertaken where feasible. Endometrial samples were the most commonly evaluated among the included studies. ZN staining and culture demonstrated high specificity (pooled specificity: 1.00) but poor sensitivity (ZN: 10%; culture: 23%). Histopathology exhibited variable sensitivity (2.56-75%) and high specificity (98%). PCR showed pooled sensitivity and specificity of 54% and 97%, respectively, with considerable heterogeneity. GeneXpert demonstrated excellent specificity (pooled 100%) but low sensitivity (14%). Menstrual blood and pelvic washings were explored with variable results; other sample types had limited diagnostic value. In conclusion, endometrial biopsy/aspirate remains the most suitable specimen for FGTB diagnosis. Molecular methods, particularly PCR, offer superior sensitivity over conventional tests, while GeneXpert's high specificity supports its role in exclusion. A multimodal diagnostic approach is recommended to enhance diagnostic yield, especially in resource-limited, high-TB-burden settings.
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.