National Clinical Laboratory on Tuberculosis, Beijing Key Laboratory for Drug-Resistant Tuberculosis Research, Beijing Chest Hospitalgrid.414341.7, Capital Medical University, Beijing Tuberculosis and Thoracic Tumor Institute, Beijing, People's Republic of China.
Fuzhou Pulmonary Hospital of Fujian, Fuzhou, People's Republic of China.
Microbiol Spectr. 2022 Aug 31;10(4):e0094922. doi: 10.1128/spectrum.00949-22. Epub 2022 Jul 25.
Due to the probability of decreased specificity, the practical value of performing the Xpert MTB/RIF Ultra (Xpert Ultra) assay over the Xpert assay for diagnosing pulmonary tuberculosis (TB) and rifampicin (RIF) resistance in a high TB burden setting was evaluated. Participants were recruited consecutively in three tertiary hospitals in China and allocated to the TB case detection and/or rifampicin (RIF) resistance detection group. Each sputum specimen was subjected to smear, MGIT960 liquid culture, and Xpert, and Xpert Ultra assay in parallel. Drug susceptibility testing was conducted for all recovered isolates in the RIF resistance detection group. In total, 1,079 patients were recruited to the case detection group and 450 to the RIF resistance detection group. Xpert Ultra had higher sensitivity than Xpert (92.26%, 322/349 versus 89.40%, 312/349; = 0.006), whereas the most prominent increase was identified in the smear-negative patients (83.70% versus 78.52%; = 0.039). The specificity of Xpert Ultra was slightly lower than that of Xpert (96.30%, 495/514 versus 98.25%, 505/514; = 0.055). Reclassifying trace results as negative resulted in a 4.01% loss of sensitivity (from 92.26% to 88.25%) accompanied by a 1.37% gain in specificity (from 96.30% to 97.67%). Both the sensitivity (97.64% versus 99.21%, = 0.313) and specificity (96.90% versus 97.21%, = 0.816) of Xpert Ultra and Xpert for detection RIF resistance were comparable. In conclusion, Xpert Ultra could improve the diagnosis of smear-negative pulmonary TB in contrast to the Xpert assay. A high percentage of TB history did not significantly decrease the specificity of the test, which supports the potential role of Xpert Ultra as an initial diagnostic tool for TB. Xpert Ultra is more sensitive than Xpert, especially in smear-negative TB. A high percentage of TB history in the non-TB population did not significantly affect the reliability of the assay, which supports the potential role of Xpert Ultra as an initial diagnostic tool for TB.
由于特异性降低的可能性,评估了在高结核负担环境中,使用 Xpert MTB/RIF Ultra(Xpert Ultra)检测比 Xpert 检测诊断肺结核(TB)和利福平(RIF)耐药的实际价值。参与者连续招募自中国的三家三级医院,并分配到 TB 病例检测和/或利福平(RIF)耐药检测组。每个痰标本均进行涂片、MGIT960 液体培养和 Xpert 及 Xpert Ultra 检测。RIF 耐药检测组中所有分离物均进行药物敏感性检测。共招募了 1079 例患者进入病例检测组和 450 例进入 RIF 耐药检测组。Xpert Ultra 的灵敏度高于 Xpert(92.26%,322/349 与 89.40%,312/349;=0.006),而在涂片阴性患者中最明显的增加(83.70%与 78.52%;=0.039)。Xpert Ultra 的特异性略低于 Xpert(96.30%,495/514 与 98.25%,505/514;=0.055)。将痕量结果重新分类为阴性会导致灵敏度降低 4.01%(从 92.26%降至 88.25%),特异性提高 1.37%(从 96.30%提高至 97.67%)。Xpert Ultra 和 Xpert 检测 RIF 耐药的灵敏度(97.64%与 99.21%,=0.313)和特异性(96.90%与 97.21%,=0.816)均相当。总之,与 Xpert 检测相比,Xpert Ultra 可提高对涂片阴性肺结核的诊断。TB 病史比例较高不会显著降低检测的特异性,这支持 Xpert Ultra 作为 TB 初始诊断工具的潜在作用。Xpert Ultra 比 Xpert 更敏感,尤其是在涂片阴性的 TB 中。非 TB 人群中较高的 TB 病史比例不会显著影响检测的可靠性,这支持 Xpert Ultra 作为 TB 初始诊断工具的潜在作用。