We have located links that may give you full text access.
Performance of Xpert MTB/RIF on Ascitic Fluid Samples for Detection of Abdominal Tuberculosis.
Journal of Laboratory Physicians 2017 January
BACKGROUND: Diagnosis of abdominal tuberculosis (TB) from ascitic fluid samples using routinely available diagnostic methods is challenging due to its paucibacillary nature. Although performance of Xpert MTB/RIF assay has been evaluated extensively on pulmonary samples, its performance on extrapulmonary samples is still under evaluation.
OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to find out the performance of Xpert MTB/RIF on ascitic fluid samples obtained from suspected cases of abdominal TB. Performance was compared with Mycobacterium growth indicator tube-960 (MGIT-960) culture and in-house multiplex polymerase chain reaction (PCR). The latter detects and differentiates Mycobacterium tuberculosis and nontuberculous mycobacteria simultaneously.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixty-seven patients suspected of probable/possible abdominal TB were included in this observational, prospective study. All samples were tested by Ziehl-Neelsen staining, MGIT-960 culture, in-house multiplex PCR, and Xpert MTB/RIF assay.
RESULTS: All 67 samples were smear negative. Seventeen (25.4%) were MGIT-960 culture positive while 12 (17.9%) were detected positive by the Xpert MTB/RIF assay and 9 (13.4%) by in-house multiplex PCR. Sensitivity and specificity of the Xpert MTB/RIF assay compared with the MGIT-960 culture were 70.6% (95%, confidence interval [CI]: 44.1-89.7) and 100% (95%, CI: 92.8-100) and that of in-house multiplex PCR were 52.9% (95%, CI: 30.9-73.8) and 100% (95%, CI: 92.8-100), respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: Diagnostic yield of Xpert MTB/RIF assay on ascitic fluid samples was lower than MGIT-960 culture. We thus emphasize on the need for urgent discovery of new biomarkers for paucibacillary TB.
OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to find out the performance of Xpert MTB/RIF on ascitic fluid samples obtained from suspected cases of abdominal TB. Performance was compared with Mycobacterium growth indicator tube-960 (MGIT-960) culture and in-house multiplex polymerase chain reaction (PCR). The latter detects and differentiates Mycobacterium tuberculosis and nontuberculous mycobacteria simultaneously.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixty-seven patients suspected of probable/possible abdominal TB were included in this observational, prospective study. All samples were tested by Ziehl-Neelsen staining, MGIT-960 culture, in-house multiplex PCR, and Xpert MTB/RIF assay.
RESULTS: All 67 samples were smear negative. Seventeen (25.4%) were MGIT-960 culture positive while 12 (17.9%) were detected positive by the Xpert MTB/RIF assay and 9 (13.4%) by in-house multiplex PCR. Sensitivity and specificity of the Xpert MTB/RIF assay compared with the MGIT-960 culture were 70.6% (95%, confidence interval [CI]: 44.1-89.7) and 100% (95%, CI: 92.8-100) and that of in-house multiplex PCR were 52.9% (95%, CI: 30.9-73.8) and 100% (95%, CI: 92.8-100), respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: Diagnostic yield of Xpert MTB/RIF assay on ascitic fluid samples was lower than MGIT-960 culture. We thus emphasize on the need for urgent discovery of new biomarkers for paucibacillary TB.
Full text links
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app