2019
DOI: 10.1128/jcm.01717-18
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Added Value of Xpert MTB/RIF Ultra for Diagnosis of Pulmonary Tuberculosis in a Low-Prevalence Setting

Abstract: Xpert MTB/RIF (Xpert) for direct molecular detection of Mycobacterium tuberculosis and rifampin resistance from clinical specimens has dramatically improved the diagnosis of tuberculosis (TB). Xpert MTB/RIF Ultra (Ultra) is proposed as a substitute of Xpert with increased sensitivity and improved rifampin resistance detection.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

4
54
1
1

Year Published

2019
2019
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 63 publications
(65 citation statements)
references
References 18 publications
4
54
1
1
Order By: Relevance
“…These data did not show any difference in sensitivity between Ultra and Xpert for smear-positive specimens but a higher sensitivity of Ultra for smear-negative specimens. Similar results were obtained in a study conducted in a region of low tuberculosis prevalence; sensitivities of Ultra and Xpert were 95.7% and 82.9%, respectively, when considering all culture-positive specimens, 100% for both tests when considering smear-positiveeculture-positive specimens, and 91.8% and 66.7% when considering smear-negativeeculture-positive specimens [16]. This suggests an increased sensitivity for Ultra, especially for paucibacillary specimens.…”
Section: Sensitivitysupporting
confidence: 85%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…These data did not show any difference in sensitivity between Ultra and Xpert for smear-positive specimens but a higher sensitivity of Ultra for smear-negative specimens. Similar results were obtained in a study conducted in a region of low tuberculosis prevalence; sensitivities of Ultra and Xpert were 95.7% and 82.9%, respectively, when considering all culture-positive specimens, 100% for both tests when considering smear-positiveeculture-positive specimens, and 91.8% and 66.7% when considering smear-negativeeculture-positive specimens [16]. This suggests an increased sensitivity for Ultra, especially for paucibacillary specimens.…”
Section: Sensitivitysupporting
confidence: 85%
“…Similarly, a correlation is also observed between the semi-quantitative result of Ultra and smear microscopy. Thus, Ultra might also help to rapidly identify the most infectious patients (those with Ultra-positive medium and high) as well as the less infectious patients, those with ultra-negative [12,16]. Studies making a direct link between the DNA load and the transmission potential are still missing.…”
Section: Correlation Between the Semi-quantitative Results Of Ultra Anmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…The increased sensitivity of Ultra is achieved by incorporation of two new PCR assays targeting the multicopy genes IS6110 and IS1081 for the diagnosis of TB, a larger DNA reaction chamber and transformation from hemi-nested to fully nested PCR reactions 7 . A number of studies report increased sensitivity of Ultra compared to Xpert in smear negative PTB [9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16] , and several studies also show promising results for diagnosing EPTB 11,14,15,[17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25] . However, most of the studies that investigate Ultra for diagnosing EPTB have been conducted in low-resource settings with high TB incidence.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%