{"title":"新型 Xpert 结核分枝杆菌/利福平(MTB/Rif)Ultra 检测法与 Xpert MTB/Rif 检测法在诊断儿童和青少年结核病方面的比较。","authors":"Harveen Kaur, Vishal Guglani, Lipika Singhal, Shivani Randev, Pankaj Kumar, Varsha Gupta","doi":"10.1093/tropej/fmad046","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Microbiological diagnosis of pediatric tuberculosis (TB) using conventional microbiological techniques has been challenging due to paucibacillary nature of the disease. Molecular methods using cartridge-based tests like Xpert, have immensely improved diagnosis. A novel next-generation cartridge test, Xpert Ultra, incorporates two additional molecular targets and claims to have much lower detection limit. We attempted to compare the two techniques in presumptive pediatric TB patients.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The aim of this study was to compare the diagnostic performance of Xpert MTB/Rif Ultra with Xpert MTB/Rif for the detection of pediatric TB.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>This is an observational comparative analytical study.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Children under 15 years of age with presumptive TB were enrolled. Appropriate specimens were obtained (sputum, induced sputum or gastric aspirate for suspected pulmonary TB, cerebrospinal fluid for suspected tubercular meningitis and pleural fluid for suspected tubercular pleural effusion), subjected to smear microscopy, mycobacterial culture, Xpert and Xpert ultra tests and other appropriate diagnostic investigations.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Out of 130 enrolled patients, 70 were diagnosed with TB using a composite reference standard (CRS). The overall sensitivity of Xpert was 64.29% [95% confidence interval (CI) 51.93-75.93%] and that of Xpert Ultra was 80% (95% CI 68.73-88.61%) with 100% overall specificity for both. The sensitivity of Xpert and Xpert Ultra in pulmonary specimens (n = 112) was 66.67% and 79.37% and in extrapulmonary specimens (n = 18) was 42.86% and 85.71%, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our study found Ultra to be more sensitive than Xpert for the detection of Mycobacterium tuberculosis in children. Our findings support the use of Xpert Ultra as initial rapid molecular diagnostic test in children under evaluation for TB.</p>","PeriodicalId":17521,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Tropical Pediatrics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The new Xpert Mycobacterium tuberculosis/rifampicin (MTB/Rif) Ultra assay in comparison to Xpert MTB/Rif assay for diagnosis of tuberculosis in children and adolescents.\",\"authors\":\"Harveen Kaur, Vishal Guglani, Lipika Singhal, Shivani Randev, Pankaj Kumar, Varsha Gupta\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/tropej/fmad046\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Microbiological diagnosis of pediatric tuberculosis (TB) using conventional microbiological techniques has been challenging due to paucibacillary nature of the disease. Molecular methods using cartridge-based tests like Xpert, have immensely improved diagnosis. A novel next-generation cartridge test, Xpert Ultra, incorporates two additional molecular targets and claims to have much lower detection limit. We attempted to compare the two techniques in presumptive pediatric TB patients.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The aim of this study was to compare the diagnostic performance of Xpert MTB/Rif Ultra with Xpert MTB/Rif for the detection of pediatric TB.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>This is an observational comparative analytical study.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Children under 15 years of age with presumptive TB were enrolled. Appropriate specimens were obtained (sputum, induced sputum or gastric aspirate for suspected pulmonary TB, cerebrospinal fluid for suspected tubercular meningitis and pleural fluid for suspected tubercular pleural effusion), subjected to smear microscopy, mycobacterial culture, Xpert and Xpert ultra tests and other appropriate diagnostic investigations.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Out of 130 enrolled patients, 70 were diagnosed with TB using a composite reference standard (CRS). The overall sensitivity of Xpert was 64.29% [95% confidence interval (CI) 51.93-75.93%] and that of Xpert Ultra was 80% (95% CI 68.73-88.61%) with 100% overall specificity for both. The sensitivity of Xpert and Xpert Ultra in pulmonary specimens (n = 112) was 66.67% and 79.37% and in extrapulmonary specimens (n = 18) was 42.86% and 85.71%, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our study found Ultra to be more sensitive than Xpert for the detection of Mycobacterium tuberculosis in children. Our findings support the use of Xpert Ultra as initial rapid molecular diagnostic test in children under evaluation for TB.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":17521,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Tropical Pediatrics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Tropical Pediatrics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/tropej/fmad046\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PEDIATRICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Tropical Pediatrics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/tropej/fmad046","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PEDIATRICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
The new Xpert Mycobacterium tuberculosis/rifampicin (MTB/Rif) Ultra assay in comparison to Xpert MTB/Rif assay for diagnosis of tuberculosis in children and adolescents.
Background: Microbiological diagnosis of pediatric tuberculosis (TB) using conventional microbiological techniques has been challenging due to paucibacillary nature of the disease. Molecular methods using cartridge-based tests like Xpert, have immensely improved diagnosis. A novel next-generation cartridge test, Xpert Ultra, incorporates two additional molecular targets and claims to have much lower detection limit. We attempted to compare the two techniques in presumptive pediatric TB patients.
Objectives: The aim of this study was to compare the diagnostic performance of Xpert MTB/Rif Ultra with Xpert MTB/Rif for the detection of pediatric TB.
Study design: This is an observational comparative analytical study.
Methods: Children under 15 years of age with presumptive TB were enrolled. Appropriate specimens were obtained (sputum, induced sputum or gastric aspirate for suspected pulmonary TB, cerebrospinal fluid for suspected tubercular meningitis and pleural fluid for suspected tubercular pleural effusion), subjected to smear microscopy, mycobacterial culture, Xpert and Xpert ultra tests and other appropriate diagnostic investigations.
Results: Out of 130 enrolled patients, 70 were diagnosed with TB using a composite reference standard (CRS). The overall sensitivity of Xpert was 64.29% [95% confidence interval (CI) 51.93-75.93%] and that of Xpert Ultra was 80% (95% CI 68.73-88.61%) with 100% overall specificity for both. The sensitivity of Xpert and Xpert Ultra in pulmonary specimens (n = 112) was 66.67% and 79.37% and in extrapulmonary specimens (n = 18) was 42.86% and 85.71%, respectively.
Conclusion: Our study found Ultra to be more sensitive than Xpert for the detection of Mycobacterium tuberculosis in children. Our findings support the use of Xpert Ultra as initial rapid molecular diagnostic test in children under evaluation for TB.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Tropical Pediatrics provides a link between theory and practice in the field. Papers report key results of clinical and community research, and considerations of programme development. More general descriptive pieces are included when they have application to work preceeding elsewhere. The journal also presents review articles, book reviews and, occasionally, short monographs and selections of important papers delivered at relevant conferences.