Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Multi-centric evaluation of Truenat MTB and MTB-RIF Dx assays for diagnosis of extrapulmonary tuberculosis
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Multi-centric evaluation of Truenat MTB and MTB-RIF Dx assays for diagnosis of extrapulmonary tuberculosis
Do you wish to request the book?
Multi-centric evaluation of Truenat MTB and MTB-RIF Dx assays for diagnosis of extrapulmonary tuberculosis
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Multi-centric evaluation of Truenat MTB and MTB-RIF Dx assays for diagnosis of extrapulmonary tuberculosis
2024
Overview
Extra-pulmonary TB (EPTB) is difficult to diagnose due to paucibacillary nature of disease. Current study evaluated accuracy of Truenat MTB and MTB-Rif Dx (TN), for detection of
Mycobacterium tuberculosis
and resistance to rifampicin. Samples were collected from 2103 treatment naive adults with presumptive EPTB, and tested by smear microscopy, liquid culture (LC) (MGIT-960) and GeneXpert MTB/RIF (GX) (Microbiological Reference Standards, MRS). TN results were compared to MRS and Composite Reference Standards (CRS, Microbiology, histopathology, radiology, clinical features prompting decision to treat, response to treatment). CRS grouped patients into 551 confirmed, 1096 unconfirmed, and 409 as unlikely TB. TN sensitivity and specificity was 73.7% and 90.4% against GX. Against LC, Overall sensitivity of GX was 67.6%, while that of TN was 62.3%. Highest sensitivity by TN was observed in pus samples (89%) and highest specificity (92%) in CSF samples, similar to GX. TN sensitivity was better in fluid and biopsy samples and slightly inferior for lymph node aspirates compared to GX. TN sensitivity for RIF resistance detection was slightly superior to GX. TN and GX results were further compared to Clinical Reference Standards. TN detected 170 TB patients initiated on treatment missed by GX, while GX detected 113 such patients missed by TN. Of 124 samples with RIF resistance discordance between GX and TN, GX reported 103/124 as sensitive, 3/124 as indeterminate and 18 as resistant (13/18 samples had low/very low DNA load) while TN reported RIF resistance indeterminate in 103/111 low/very low DNA load samples. Due to paucibacillary nature of EPTB samples, culture yield was poor and phenotypic drug susceptibility testing failed to resolve the discordance. The study establishes TN
at par
with GX and can be utilized for quick and accurate diagnosis of EPTB.
Publisher
Nature Publishing Group UK,Nature Publishing Group,Nature Portfolio
Subject
/ 631/337
/ Adult
/ Aged
/ Biopsy
/ Composite reference standards
/ DNA
/ Drug Resistance, Bacterial - genetics
/ Female
/ Humanities and Social Sciences
/ Humans
/ Male
/ Microbiological reference standards
/ Mycobacterium tuberculosis - drug effects
/ Mycobacterium tuberculosis - genetics
/ Mycobacterium tuberculosis - isolation & purification
/ Patients
/ Rifampin
/ Science
