User Guide
Why can I only view 3 results?
You can also view all results when you are connected from the network of member institutions only. For non-member institutions, we are opening a 1-month free trial version if institution officials apply.
So many results that aren't mine?
References in many bibliographies are sometimes referred to as "Surname, I", so the citations of academics whose Surname and initials are the same may occasionally interfere. This problem is often the case with citation indexes all over the world.
How can I see only citations to my article?
After searching the name of your article, you can see the references to the article you selected as soon as you click on the details section.
 Views 17
 Downloands 1
Diagnostic value of nine nucleic acid amplification test systems for Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex
2015
Journal:  
Journal of Microbiology and Infectious Diseases
Author:  
Abstract:

Objective: In this study, nine commercial Nucleic Acid Amplification Test Systems (NAATs) were evaluated for diagnostic performance of Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex (MTBC) from smear positive sputum species (SPss) and smear negative sputum specimens (SNss). Methods: Sixty SPss and 55 SNss were examined microscopically by Ehrlich Ziehl Neelsen (EZN) staining method, and also inoculated on Löwenstein Jensen (LJ) medium for culture. The sensitivity and specificity of nine NAATs were calculated according to LJ culture method accepted as gold standard. Results: When LJ culture results were taken as gold standard; the sensitivity rates of method COBAS Amplicor MTB (Method A), GenProbe MTD (Method B), Cobas TaqMan MTB PCR (Method C), iCycler iQ RT PCR (Method D), TaqMan PCR AB 5700 (Method E), TaqMan PCR AB7700 (Method F), LightCycler® 480 RT PCR (Method G), Rotor Gene RT PCR (Method H) and the AdvanSure TB/NTM RT PCR (Method I) for SPss were 98.3 %, 93.3 %, 96.7 %, 100 %, 93.3 %, 100 %, 100 %, 100 % and 100 %, respectively. The sensitivity was 53.84% for the methods A, B, D, E, G and I; 38.46% for the method C and H; 61.5% for the method F for the method I in SNss. There were no statistical significant differences between the nine NAATs (p≥0.05). The specificity was 100% for all nine NAATs in SNss. The positivity rates of methods were 53.8% for methods A, B, D, E, G, I; 38.5% for methods C and H, and 61.5% for method F in SNss. These rates were 100% for D, F, G, H and I; 98.3% for method A; 96.7% for method C; 93,3% for methods B and E in SPss. Statistical analysis showed that there was no statistically significant differences among the nine NAATs (p≥0.05). Conclusion: It is concluded that the nine NAATs might be useful for detecting MTBC from SPss, but not effective for SNss. J Microbiol Infect Dis 2015;5(3): 103-109 Key words: Tuberculosis, polymerase chain reaction, nucleic acid amplification test, smear positive, smear negative, sputum

Keywords:

Citation Owners
Information: There is no ciation to this publication.
Similar Articles












Journal of Microbiology and Infectious Diseases

Field :   Sağlık Bilimleri

Journal Type :   Uluslararası

Metrics
Article : 450
Cite : 96
Journal of Microbiology and Infectious Diseases