2016
DOI: 10.1128/jcm.01196-16
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

First Evaluation of GenoType MTBDR plus 2.0 Performed Directly on Respiratory Specimens in Central America

Abstract: dThe turnaround times for conventional methods used to detect Mycobacterium tuberculosis in sputum samples and to obtain drug susceptibility information are long in many developing countries, including Panama, leading to delays in appropriate treatment initiation and continued transmission in the community. We evaluated the performance of a molecular line probe assay, the Genotype MTBDRplus version 2.0 assay, in detecting M. tuberculosis complex directly in respiratory specimens from smearpositive tuberculosis… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

0
2
1

Year Published

2018
2018
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 23 publications
0
2
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Diagnostic performance characteristics for LPA in our context were similar to those reported in nontrial settings on direct sputum, with a sensitivity of 88% and a specificity of 97% for the detection of INH resistance. Sensitivity for RIF resistance was 69%, lower than reported elsewhere [6,7], and might be due to the low prevalence of RIF resistance in our study (only 13 patients), the existence of alternative mutations conferring rifampicin resistance than identified by LPA testing, or possible coexisting drug-resistant and drug-susceptible strains or heteroresistance [12].…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 67%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Diagnostic performance characteristics for LPA in our context were similar to those reported in nontrial settings on direct sputum, with a sensitivity of 88% and a specificity of 97% for the detection of INH resistance. Sensitivity for RIF resistance was 69%, lower than reported elsewhere [6,7], and might be due to the low prevalence of RIF resistance in our study (only 13 patients), the existence of alternative mutations conferring rifampicin resistance than identified by LPA testing, or possible coexisting drug-resistant and drug-susceptible strains or heteroresistance [12].…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 67%
“…In Vietnam, sensitivity of 93.1% for rifampin (RIF) resistance, 92.6% for isoniazid (INH) resistance, and 88.9% for multidrug-resistant TB (MDR-TB) have been reported with 100% specificity [3]. Although less commonly used, MTBDR plus tested directly on sputum samples has demonstrated acceptable test performance characteristics compared to culture when used on smear-positive sputum samples in several settings [4,5,6,7]. Nevertheless, molecular testing on sputum is not routinely conducted.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…[9] Xpert MTB/RIF assay is an emerging and available automatic molecular diagnosis method, while the high-cost restricts its widespread use. [10] Therefore, it is urgent to establish sensitive and efficient methods for the diagnosis of Mtb infection. Notably, relevant studies in non-coding RNAs have provided new avenues.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%