Evidence map›Paper›PMID 8586706›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology1995

Comparison of Amplicor, in-house PCR, and conventional culture for detection of Mycobacterium tuberculosis in clinical samples.

J Schirm, L A Oostendorp, J G Mulder

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 1995. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

J SchirmRegional Public Health Laboratory, Groningen, The Netherlands.
L A Oostendorp
J G Mulder

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Five hundred four clinical specimens (337 sputum and 167 bronchial samples) from 340 patients were tested for the presence of M. tuberculosis complex by the Amplicor M. tuberculosis test and by an in-house PCR. The results were compared with those obtained by conventional culture and by direct microscopy. Thirty specimens (from 14 patients) were positive by in-house PCR, 25 (from 13 patients) were positive by the Amplicor M. tuberculosis test, and 24 (from 10 patients) were positive by culture. Cultures from 16 specimens were contaminated with other bacteria. Strong inhibition of in-house PCR was found with three samples. After discordancy analyses, with clinical data as supportive evidence for tuberculosis, 27 true-positive and 458 true-negative samples were defined. On the basis of these figures, the sensitivities of the Amplicor M. tuberculosis test, in-house PCR, culture, and microscopy were 70.4, 92.6, 88.9, and 52.4%, respectively. The specificities of all four tests were higher than 98%. The good performance of the in-house PCR for detection of M. tuberculosis makes it a very useful additional tool in M. tuberculosis diagnostics. In contrast, the Amplicor test needs to be improved. Twenty-three of the Amplicor-negative samples were further tested for inhibition of the Amplicor system by retesting the DNA extracts after the addition of M. tuberculosis DNA. In 15 of these samples, 5 true positives and 10 true negatives, inhibition of the Amplicor test was demonstrated. This might explain the lack of sensitivity of the Amplicor test. If the inhibition problem can be solved, the Amplicor M. tuberculosis test, which is already rapid, very user-friendly, and reasonably priced, may certainly become very useful in microbiological laboratories.

Indexed as

Bacteriological TechniquesNucleic Acid Amplification TechniquesDiagnostic ErrorsEvaluation Studies as TopicHumansMycobacterium tuberculosisPolymerase Chain ReactionSensitivity and SpecificityTuberculosis, Pulmonary

Identifiers

PMID8586706
PMCPMC228677

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.