Guomei Wei1, Jing Mu1, Guirong Wang1, Fengmin Huo1, Lingling Dong1, Yunxu Li1, Hairong Huang1. 1. 1 National Clinical Laboratory on Tuberculosis, Beijing Key laboratory for Drug-resistant Tuberculosis Research, 2 Department of Pathology, Beijing Chest Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing Tuberculosis and Thoracic Tumor Institute, Beijing 101149, China.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The Xpert MTB/RIF assay (Xpert; Cepheid, Sunnyvale, CA, USA) has been widely used for pulmonary and extra-pulmonary tuberculosis (TB) diagnosis. In clinical practice, specimen yielding smear-negative, culture-negative but Xpert-positive results is frequently confronted. Due to the notorious possibility of contamination that molecular tests always been thought of, Xpert-positive results without bacteriological supporting evidence arouse great confusions to clinicians. METHODS: A retrospective study was performed. From April 2014 to February 2015, 852 clinical specimens were Xpert-positive. The results of Xpert assay, bacteriological and pathological examinations from either the same specimens or from the specimens collected during same clinical operations were investigated. RESULTS: A total of 90 specimens with Xpert-positive but smear-negative and culture-negative results were recruited, and 81 of them were pus specimens collected from Bone and Joint Tuberculosis (BJTB) patients. According to the pathological examination results, 77 of the 81 pus specimens, 8 of 9 other types of specimens were confirmed as either TB or strongly suggestive of TB; three pus specimens and one biopsy tissue were also suggested TB but with less stronger evidence; only one pus specimen was not TB suggestive. CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrated that Xpert could be trusted for BJTB diagnosis even when no supporting bacteriological evidence is available in high TB prevalence settings. Our results will alleviate the confusion among clinicians in such scenarios.
BACKGROUND: The Xpert MTB/RIF assay (Xpert; Cepheid, Sunnyvale, CA, USA) has been widely used for pulmonary and extra-pulmonary tuberculosis (TB) diagnosis. In clinical practice, specimen yielding smear-negative, culture-negative but Xpert-positive results is frequently confronted. Due to the notorious possibility of contamination that molecular tests always been thought of, Xpert-positive results without bacteriological supporting evidence arouse great confusions to clinicians. METHODS: A retrospective study was performed. From April 2014 to February 2015, 852 clinical specimens were Xpert-positive. The results of Xpert assay, bacteriological and pathological examinations from either the same specimens or from the specimens collected during same clinical operations were investigated. RESULTS: A total of 90 specimens with Xpert-positive but smear-negative and culture-negative results were recruited, and 81 of them were pus specimens collected from Bone and Joint Tuberculosis (BJTB) patients. According to the pathological examination results, 77 of the 81 pus specimens, 8 of 9 other types of specimens were confirmed as either TB or strongly suggestive of TB; three pus specimens and one biopsy tissue were also suggested TB but with less stronger evidence; only one pus specimen was not TB suggestive. CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrated that Xpert could be trusted for BJTB diagnosis even when no supporting bacteriological evidence is available in high TB prevalence settings. Our results will alleviate the confusion among clinicians in such scenarios.
Authors: V N Chihota; A D Grant; K Fielding; B Ndibongo; A van Zyl; D Muirhead; G J Churchyard Journal: Int J Tuberc Lung Dis Date: 2010-08 Impact factor: 2.373
Authors: Catharina C Boehme; Pamela Nabeta; Doris Hillemann; Mark P Nicol; Shubhada Shenai; Fiorella Krapp; Jenny Allen; Rasim Tahirli; Robert Blakemore; Roxana Rustomjee; Ana Milovic; Martin Jones; Sean M O'Brien; David H Persing; Sabine Ruesch-Gerdes; Eduardo Gotuzzo; Camilla Rodrigues; David Alland; Mark D Perkins Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2010-09-01 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Mikashmi Kohli; Ian Schiller; Nandini Dendukuri; Keertan Dheda; Claudia M Denkinger; Samuel G Schumacher; Karen R Steingart Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2018-08-27
Authors: S Abhimanyu; Anil K Jain; V P Myneedu; Vinod K Arora; Manish Chadha; Rohit Sarin Journal: Indian J Orthop Date: 2021-01-25 Impact factor: 1.251
Authors: Giulia Lombardi; Valentina Di Gregori; Nicolò Girometti; Marina Tadolini; Francesco Bisognin; Paola Dal Monte Journal: PLoS One Date: 2017-04-21 Impact factor: 3.240