LATIN Neurosurgery Journal
Document Type
Original Article
Abstract
Introduction: Tuberculosis is an infectious disease that ranks as the thirteenth cause of death worldwide. As is known, tuberculo sis is not only limited to the lungs, but there is a wide range of extrapulmonary pathologies. Current diagnostic methods for spinal tuberculosis are limited by the time factor in order to provide results early and reliably. GeneX pert MTB/RIF is currently available as an al ternative, fast and reliable test for pathogen identification.
Methodology: This systematic review adheres to the PRISMA [1] criteria. The objective of the systematic review was to analyze the quality of the evidence gener ated on the topic ”GeneXpert as a diagnostic method for spinal tuberculosis” in the period ”January 2017-August 2022”. The keywords used in PubMed were ”Spinal tuberculosis and GeneXpert. all the articles of evidence level I-IV excluding only comprehensive re views, selected articles were evaluated with the GRADE system [2,3,4] and subsequently a SORT [5] type recommendation was issued in cases where it was feasible. The SORT recommendations were reviewed by consen sus by the TB study group using the Delphi system.
Results: 5 studies met the search criteria and were included in the review. The 5 corresponded to cross-sectional studies, 4 of these were prospective and 1 retrospective. All studies aimed to determine the diagnostic accuracy, specificity, and sensitivity of the GeneXpert test compared to standard reference tests such as culture and histopathology from tissue or pus-like discharge samples. Without being studied, GeneXpert was also found to have a high sensitivity and specificity for identifying rifampin resistance.
Conclusion: The GeneXpert test is an efficient and reliable method for the diagno sis of spinal tuberculosis. In addition, with the reduction of time in early diagnosis, a timely therapeutic intervention can be carried out and the complications of the disease can be reduced.
Recommended Citation
Reyes-Quezada, Erika; Núñez-Castillo, María E.; Aleixo-Nogueira, Pedro; Alpizar-Aguirre, Armando; Arancibia-Baspineiro, Tania; Burgos-Flores, Julio C.; Fernandes-Joaquim, Andrei; Laos-Plasier, Eduardo; Salazar-Maldonado, Byron; Salazar-Flores, Jorge; Lizarazu-Oroz, Edson; Llanos-Lucero, Carlos A.; López-Segales, José L.; Magalhães-de Souza, Thiago; Mier-García, Juan F.; Molina-Pizarro, Fernando; Normabuena, Filadelfo; Quispe-Alanoca, Wilson; Sacramento-da Silva, Paulo G.; Salcedo-Moreno, Juan C.; Sánchez-Mamani, Josselin M.; Santos-de Queiroz-Chaves, Felipe A.; Simón-Nunes, Reddy A.; Soto-García, Manuel E.; Del Valle-Oros, Perla M.; Israel-Romero-Rangel, José A.; Duchén-Rodríguez, Luis M.; and Soriano-Sánchez, José A.
(2024)
"GeneXpert MTB/RIF as a diagnostic test for spinal tuberculosis: Systematic review,"
LATIN Neurosurgery Journal: Vol. 1:
Iss.
1, Article 6.
Available at:
https://www.latin-neurosurgery.org/home/vol1/iss1/6
References
[1] Alessandro Liberati et al. The prisma statement for reporting systematic re views and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate healthcare interventions: Ex planation and elaboration. BMJ, 339:1 67, 2009.
[2] Jan L. Brozek et al. Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommenda tions in clinical practice guidelines part 3 of 3. the grade approach to develop ing recommendations. Allergy Euro pean Journal of Allergy and Clinical Im munology, 66:588–595, 2011.
[3] Jan L. Brozek et al. Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommen dations in clinical practice guidelines: Part 2 of 3. the grade approach to grad ing quality of evidence about diagnos tic tests and strategies. Allergy Euro pean Journal of Allergy and Clinical Im munology, 64:1109–1116, 2009.
[4] Jan L. Broek et al. Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommen dations in clinical practice guidelines: Part 1 of 3. an overview of the grade approach and grading quality of evi dence about interventions. Allergy Eu ropean Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, 64:669–677, 2009.
[5] Mark H. Ebell. Strength of recommen dation taxonomy (sort). American Fam ily Physician, 83:1227, 2011.
[6] World Health Organization. Tuberculo sis, 2021. Internet.
[7] Zibo Zhou, Yan Zheng, and Leiming Wang. Diagnostic accuracy of the xpert mtb/rif assay for bone and joint tuber culosis using tissue specimens. Inter national Journal of Infectious Diseases, 105:224–229, 2021.
[8] Yali Yu, Yiyi Kong, Jing Ye, and Aiguo Wang. Performance of conventional histopathology and genexpert mtb/rif in the diagnosis of spinal tuberculosis from bone specimens: a prospective clinical study. Clinical Biochemistry, 85:33–37, 2020.
[9] Vijay Karthek, Pramod Bhilare, Shailesh Hadgaonkar, Ajay Kothari, Ashok Shyam, Parag Sancheti, and 40 Siddharth N Aiyer. Gene xpert/mtb rif assay for spinal tuberculosis-sensitivity, specificity and clinical utility. Journal of Clinical Orthopaedics and Trauma, 16:233–238, 2021.
[10] Q. Yiwei et al. Tuberculosis-specific antigen/phytohemagglutinin ratio com bined with genexpert mtb/rif for early diagnosis of spinal tuberculosis: A prospective cohort study, 2022.
[11] Jwalant Patel, Mihir Upadhyay, Vishal Kundnani, Zahir Merchant, Sanyam Jain, and Neil Kire. Diagnostic effi cacy, sensitivity, and specificity of xpert mtb/rif assay for spinal tuberculosis and rifampicin resistance. Spine, 45(3):163 169, 2020.
Included in
Epidemiology Commons, Health Information Technology Commons, Neurosciences Commons, Neurosurgery Commons