English Abstract
Journal Article
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

[Comparison of the efficacies of cross priming amplification and RealAmp with XpertMTB/RIF for the diagnosis of pulmonary tuberculosis at peripheral microscopic center].

Objective: To compare the efficacies of cross priming amplification (CPA) and RealAmp with XpertMTB/RIF for the diagnosis of pulmonary tuberculosis(TB) at peripheral microscopic centers. Methods: From December of 2014 to December of 2015, 3 193 patients suspected with TB were enrolled consecutively at 3 county level TB clinical clinics in Zhongmu, Xinmi and Dengzhou of Henan province. Totally 3 193 collected sputum samples were detected by smear microscopy, L-J media culture, CPA, RealAmp and Xpert MTB/RIF. The culture positive samples were tested by MPB64 for strain identification. The sensitivity and specificity of CPA, RealAmp and Xpert MTB/RIF were calculated according to L-J solid culture results and clinical diagnosis results. Results: The sensitivity of CPA, RealAmp and Xpert MTB/RIF were 85.5%(413/483), 85.5%(413/483) and 87.9%(422/480), respectively, compared with L-J solid culture, the difference among the 3 methods being not significant(χ(2)=1.6, P >0.05). The specificity of CPA, RealAmp and Xpert MTB/RIF were 96.8%(2 624/2 170), 93.2%(2 527/2 170) and 95.3%(2 567/2 170) compared with culture; and there was a significantly statistic difference among the 3 methods(χ(2)=37.8, P <0.001). The sensitivity of smear microscopy, culture, CPA, RealAmp and Xpert MTB/RIF was 21.7%(300/1 383), 34.9%(483/1 383), 34.6%(478/1 383), 39.2%(542/1 383) and 38.1%(526/1 381) compared with clinical diagnosis. The sensitivity of CPA, RealAmp and Xpert MTB/RIF was higher than that of smear (χ(2) =31.9, P <0.01), but there was no significantly statistic difference between the 3 molecular methods(χ(2)=2.9, P >0.05). The specificity of smear microscopy, L-J solid culture, CPA, RealAmp and Xpert MTB/RIF was 100%(1 810/1 810), 100%(1 810/1 810), 98.8%(1 789/1 810), 98.8%(1 756/1 810) and 97.0%(1 788/1 810), and there was no significantly statistic difference among the 3 molecular methods(χ(2)=0.16, P >0.05). Conclusion: The capability of CPA and RealAmp for diagnosing pulmonary TB was similar to Xpert MTB/RIF.The former 2 methods were more suitable to apply to the diagnoses of pulmonary TB in peripheral laboratories.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

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 Toggle icon

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