{"title":"An Analysis of Xpert Test for Diagnosing Maxillofacial Tuberculosis.","authors":"Richik Tripathi, Nidhi Singh, Rahul Agrawal, Akhilesh Chandra, Rathindra Bera, Mital R Asodariya","doi":"10.1007/s12663-021-01645-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Maxillofacial tuberculosis is a diagnostic challenge for surgeons. The aim of this study was to present a detailed analysis of Xpert test in diagnosing maxillofacial tuberculosis and to analyse the accuracy of Xpert test results for various tissues of maxillofacial region.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>In this cross-sectional study, patients were selected randomly from outpatient department. The patients who had clinical picture and differential diagnosis highly suggestive of maxillofacial tuberculosis were included. Patients were divided into three different groups depending upon the site of involvement. The samples collected from the patients were further subdivided depending upon the type of specimen. Patients were screened first by routine tests, and the negative cases were followed by Xpert test for tuberculosis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 54 patients were enrolled in the study, 13 patients were found to be positive for maxillofacial tuberculosis on routine screening tests for tuberculosis, and 41 tested negative on routine test and were evaluated further through Xpert test. Specimens from bone (<i>n</i>12), soft tissue and skin biopsy (<i>n</i>15) and aspirates from lymph nodes (<i>n</i>14) were obtained and tested. Twenty-one samples were found to be positive, and 20 were negative upon Xpert testing. There was a statistically significant difference seen between the test groups (<i>p</i> < 0.01) with higher frequency of negative results in routine test. The <i>p</i> value for various specimens containing pus, biopsies and aspirates was 0.045, 0.023 and 0.067, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Xpert test is more accurate when compared to routine test for diagnosing maxillofacial tuberculosis. Although accuracy of Xpert test is better for pus and biopsy samples in the specimens from bone and soft tissue, it gives poor accuracy for aspirated cells. The aspirates from lymph nodes were more susceptible for false negative test.</p>","PeriodicalId":47495,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Maxillofacial & Oral Surgery","volume":"22 3","pages":"533-537"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10390446/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Maxillofacial & Oral Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12663-021-01645-7","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/9/24 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Maxillofacial tuberculosis is a diagnostic challenge for surgeons. The aim of this study was to present a detailed analysis of Xpert test in diagnosing maxillofacial tuberculosis and to analyse the accuracy of Xpert test results for various tissues of maxillofacial region.
Materials and methods: In this cross-sectional study, patients were selected randomly from outpatient department. The patients who had clinical picture and differential diagnosis highly suggestive of maxillofacial tuberculosis were included. Patients were divided into three different groups depending upon the site of involvement. The samples collected from the patients were further subdivided depending upon the type of specimen. Patients were screened first by routine tests, and the negative cases were followed by Xpert test for tuberculosis.
Results: A total of 54 patients were enrolled in the study, 13 patients were found to be positive for maxillofacial tuberculosis on routine screening tests for tuberculosis, and 41 tested negative on routine test and were evaluated further through Xpert test. Specimens from bone (n12), soft tissue and skin biopsy (n15) and aspirates from lymph nodes (n14) were obtained and tested. Twenty-one samples were found to be positive, and 20 were negative upon Xpert testing. There was a statistically significant difference seen between the test groups (p < 0.01) with higher frequency of negative results in routine test. The p value for various specimens containing pus, biopsies and aspirates was 0.045, 0.023 and 0.067, respectively.
Conclusion: Xpert test is more accurate when compared to routine test for diagnosing maxillofacial tuberculosis. Although accuracy of Xpert test is better for pus and biopsy samples in the specimens from bone and soft tissue, it gives poor accuracy for aspirated cells. The aspirates from lymph nodes were more susceptible for false negative test.
期刊介绍:
This journal offers comprehensive coverage of new techniques, important developments and innovative ideas in Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery. Practice-applicable articles help develop the methods used to handle dentoalveolar surgery, facial injuries and deformities, TMJ disorders, oral cancer, jaw reconstruction, anesthesia and analgesia. The journal also includes specifics on new instruments, diagnostic equipment’s and modern therapeutic drugs and devices. Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery is recommended for first or priority subscription by the Dental Section of the Medical Library Association. Specific topics covered recently have included: ? distraction osteogenesis ? synthetic bone substitutes ? fibroblast growth factors ? fetal wound healing ? skull base surgery ? computer-assisted surgery ? vascularized bone grafts Benefits to authorsWe also provide many author benefits, such as free PDFs, a liberal copyright policy, special discounts on Elsevier publications and much more. Please click here for more information on our author services.