ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology1997
Detection and identification of mycobacteria by amplification of RNA and DNA in pretreated blood and bone marrow aspirates by a simple lysis method.
Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 1997. 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, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prevalence ofFrontiers in microbiology · 2024Pooled it
- Biosensing technologies for Mycobacterium tuberculosis detection: status and new developments.Clinical & developmental immunology · 2011Review
- Misidentification of Mycobacterium leprae as Mycobacterium intracellulare by the COBAS AMPLICOR M. intracellulare test.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2005Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A sodium dodecyl (lauryl) sulfate method was evaluated for the preparation of blood specimens and bone marrow aspirates for use in two amplification procedures (Gen-Probe Amplified Mycobacterium Tuberculosis Direct Test [AMTDT] and Roche Amplicor M. avium/M. intracellulare [MAI] Test) for the detection and identification of Mycobacterium tuberculosis and M. avium and M. intracellulare, respectively. The AMTDT is based on amplification of rRNA, whereas the Amplicor MAI Test amplifies a specific DNA region of the 16S rRNA gene. The results of amplification techniques were compared with those of standard culture and culture in BACTEC 13A and BACTEC 12B liquid media. A total of 121 blood specimens and 15 bone marrow aspirates were collected from 136 AIDS patients. Mycobacterial growth was recovered for 103 specimens; 35 yielded M. tuberculosis, 62 yielded M. avium, 5 yielded M. genavense, and 1 yielded M. kansasii. The values of sensitivity and specificity in pretreated specimens for detection of M. tuberculosis by the AMTDT were 94.3 and 100%, respectively, and those for detection of M. avium by the Amplicor MAI Test were 91.9 and 100%, respectively. The simple lysis method described in the present work allows the recovery of mycobacteria from blood specimens and bone marrow aspirates and may be used in combination with the AMTDT and the Amplicor MAI Test to detect and identify different members of the genus Mycobacterium. This method might also be applicable for the identification of mycobacteria from blood culture fluids with acridinium-ester-labeled DNA probes.
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.