首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Clinical Microbiology >Comparison of Two Nucleic Acid Amplification Assays, the Xpert MTB/RIF Assay and the Amplified Mycobacterium Tuberculosis Direct Assay, for Detection of Mycobacterium tuberculosis in Respiratory and Nonrespiratory Specimens
【24h】

Comparison of Two Nucleic Acid Amplification Assays, the Xpert MTB/RIF Assay and the Amplified Mycobacterium Tuberculosis Direct Assay, for Detection of Mycobacterium tuberculosis in Respiratory and Nonrespiratory Specimens

机译:比较两种用于检测呼吸道和非呼吸道标本中的结核分枝杆菌的核酸扩增检测法,Xpert MTB / RIF检测法和扩增的结核分枝杆菌直接检测法

获取原文
       

摘要

We compared the performance of the Xpert MTB/RIF assay, a new real-time tuberculosis (TB) PCR test, with that of the Amplified Mycobacterium Tuberculosis Direct (MTD) assay using 162 respiratory and nonrespiratory specimens. Based on culture as the gold standard, the overall sensitivity and specificity for all sample types for the Xpert MTB/RIF assay were 90.9 and 89%, respectively, while for the MTD assay, the overall sensitivity and specificity were 97.3 and 87.1%, respectively. A higher proportion of total equivocal results were obtained for the MTD assay, at 10.5% (17/162), while the Xpert MTB/RIF assay generated 5.5% (9/162) of invalid reads.
机译:我们比较了Xpert MTB / RIF检测(一种新的实时结核(TB)PCR检测)与使用162个呼吸道和非呼吸道标本的扩增型结核分枝杆菌直接(MTD)检测的性能。基于培养作为金标准,Xpert MTB / RIF分析的所有样品类型的总体敏感性和特异性分别为90.9和89%,而MTD分析的总体敏感性和特异性分别为97.3和87.1% 。对于MTD分析,获得较高的总不确定结果比例为10.5%(17/162),而Xpert MTB / RIF分析产生了5.5%(9/162)的无效读数。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号