SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2022
Xpert MTB/RIF Ultra assay for tuberculosis disease and rifampicin resistance in children.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 61 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Value of Xpert® MTB/RIF Ultra in Cases With Suspected Tuberculosis
Evaluation of Xpert MTB/RIF Ultra in Stools and Urine to Improve Tuberculosis Diagnosis in Children
Who cites it
61 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 86 citations in OpenAlex.
- Xpert MTB/RIF Ultra assay for tuberculosis disease and rifampicin resistance in children.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025Pooled it
- Xpert MTB/RIF Ultra assay for pulmonary tuberculosis and rifampicin resistance in adults and adolescents.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025Pooled it
- Low-complexity manual nucleic acid amplification tests for pulmonary tuberculosis in children.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025Pooled it
- Parallel use of low-complexity automated nucleic acid amplification tests on respiratory and stool samples with or without lateral flow lipoarabinomannan assays to detect pulmonary tuberculosis disease in children.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025Pooled it
- Performance of stool-based molecular tests and processing methods for paediatric tuberculosis diagnosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.The Lancet. Microbe · 2025Pooled it
- Truenat MTB assays for pulmonary tuberculosis and rifampicin resistance in adults and adolescents.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025Pooled it
- Diagnostic performance of a centrifugation-free stool processing kit in conjunction with XpertBMC infectious diseases · 2026Trial
- Uptake and feasibility of task-shifting of Xpert MTB/RIF Ultra testing from laboratory technicians to nurses to increase access and reduce time to results: a multicountry mixed method research.BMJ global health · 2026Article
- Microglia-Mediated Ependymal Injury in Bacille Calmette-Guérin-Induced Meningitis Is Attenuated by Sodium Butyrate with Restoration of Hmgcs2 Expression.Advances in respiratory medicine · 2026Article
- Divergent Trajectories of Pediatric All-Form Tuberculosis and Multidrug-Resistant Tuberculosis from 1990 to 2021.Microorganisms · 2026Article
- Optimizing Diagnostic Protocols for Pulmonary Tuberculosis in Children: A Comparison of Diagnostic Yields From One-day, Two-day and Three-day Specimen Collection Strategies.The Pediatric infectious disease journal · 2026Article
- Utility of stool culture for the diagnosis and management of paediatric TB in a low-burden setting.IJTLD open · 2026Article
- Stool Processing Methods for Xpert Ultra Testing in Childhood Tuberculosis: A Prospective, Multicountry Accuracy Study.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2026Article
- Tuberculosis Diagnostic Methods: Clinical Applicability, Implementation Challenges, and Integrated Testing Strategies.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Multicohort assessment of plasma metabolic signatures of tuberculosis disease in children: a retrospective cross-sectional study.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- GeneXpert MTB/RIF Ultra in Pediatric Tuberculosis: How Disease Characteristics Modify Test Performances.Current pediatric reviews · 2026Article
- The microbiological diagnosis of pediatric tuberculosis: focus on the Ultra test.Jornal brasileiro de pneumologia : publicacao oficial da Sociedade Brasileira de Pneumologia e Tisilogia · 2026Article
- Drug resistance mechanisms inFrontiers in pharmacology · 2026Review
- From gaps to progress: five-year global advances in the diagnosis of pediatric tuberculosis.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2026Review
- Prevalence, incidence, and outcome of tuberculosis among young hospitalised children with acute illness in Sub-Saharan Africa and South East Asia.Journal of global health · 2025Article
1 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
- Update of
Authors and funding
12 authors at 7 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundEvery year, an estimated one million children and young adolescents become ill with tuberculosis, and around 226,000 of those children die. Xpert MTB/RIF Ultra (Xpert Ultra) is a molecular World Health Organization (WHO)-recommended rapid diagnostic test that simultaneously detects Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex and rifampicin resistance. We previously published a Cochrane Review 'Xpert MTB/RIF and Xpert MTB/RIF Ultra assays for tuberculosis disease and rifampicin resistance in children'. The current review updates evidence on the diagnostic accuracy of Xpert Ultra in children presumed to have tuberculosis disease. Parts of this review update informed the 2022 WHO updated guidance on management of tuberculosis in children and adolescents.
objectivesTo assess the diagnostic accuracy of Xpert Ultra for detecting: pulmonary tuberculosis, tuberculous meningitis, lymph node tuberculosis, and rifampicin resistance, in children with presumed tuberculosis. Secondary objectives To investigate potential sources of heterogeneity in accuracy estimates. For detection of tuberculosis, we considered age, comorbidity (HIV, severe pneumonia, and severe malnutrition), and specimen type as potential sources. To summarize the frequency of Xpert Ultra trace results. SEARCH
methodsWe searched the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register, MEDLINE, Embase, three other databases, and three trial registers without language restrictions to 9 March 2021. SELECTION CRITERIA: Cross-sectional and cohort studies and randomized trials that evaluated Xpert Ultra in HIV-positive and HIV-negative children under 15 years of age. We included ongoing studies that helped us address the review objectives. We included studies evaluating sputum, gastric, stool, or nasopharyngeal specimens (pulmonary tuberculosis), cerebrospinal fluid (tuberculous meningitis), and fine needle aspirate or surgical biopsy tissue (lymph node tuberculosis). For detecting tuberculosis, reference standards were microbiological (culture) or composite reference standard; for stool, we also included Xpert Ultra performed on a routine respiratory specimen. For detecting rifampicin resistance, reference standards were drug susceptibility testing or MTBDRplus. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently extracted data and, using QUADAS-2, assessed methodological quality judging risk of bias separately for each target condition and reference standard. For each target condition, we used the bivariate model to estimate summary sensitivity and specificity with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We stratified all analyses by type of reference standard. We summarized the frequency of Xpert Ultra trace results; trace represents detection of a very low quantity of Mycobacterium tuberculosis DNA. We assessed certainty of evidence using GRADE. MAIN
resultsWe identified 14 studies (11 new studies since the previous review). For detection of pulmonary tuberculosis, 335 data sets (25,937 participants) were available for analysis. We did not identify any studies that evaluated Xpert Ultra accuracy for tuberculous meningitis or lymph node tuberculosis. Three studies evaluated Xpert Ultra for detection of rifampicin resistance. Ten studies (71%) took place in countries with a high tuberculosis burden based on WHO classification. Overall, risk of bias was low. Detection of pulmonary tuberculosis Sputum, 5 studies Xpert Ultra summary sensitivity verified by culture was 75.3% (95% CI 64.3 to 83.8; 127 participants; high-certainty evidence), and specificity was 97.1% (95% CI 94.7 to 98.5; 1054 participants; high-certainty evidence). Gastric aspirate, 7 studies Xpert Ultra summary sensitivity verified by culture was 70.4% (95% CI 53.9 to 82.9; 120 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), and specificity was 94.1% (95% CI 84.8 to 97.8; 870 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Stool, 6 studies Xpert Ultra summary sensitivity verified by culture was 56.1% (95% CI 39.1 to 71.7; 200 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), and specificity was 98.0% (95% CI 93.3 to 99.4; 1232 participants; high certainty-evidence). Nasopharyngeal aspirate, 4 studies Xpert Ultra summary sensitivity verified by culture was 43.7% (95% CI 26.7 to 62.2; 46 participants; very low-certainty evidence), and specificity was 97.5% (95% CI 93.6 to 99.0; 489 participants; high-certainty evidence). Xpert Ultra sensitivity was lower against a composite than a culture reference standard for all specimen types other than nasopharyngeal aspirate, while specificity was similar against both reference standards. Interpretation of results In theory, for a population of 1000 children: • where 100 have pulmonary tuberculosis in sputum (by culture): - 101 would be Xpert Ultra-positive, and of these, 26 (26%) would not have pulmonary tuberculosis (false positive); and - 899 would be Xpert Ultra-negative, and of these, 25 (3%) would have tuberculosis (false negative). • where 100 have pulmonary tuberculosis in gastric aspirate (by culture): - 123 would be Xpert Ultra-positive, and of these, 53 (43%) would not have pulmonary tuberculosis (false positive); and - 877 would be Xpert Ultra-negative, and of these, 30 (3%) would have tuberculosis (false negative). • where 100 have pulmonary tuberculosis in stool (by culture): - 74 would be Xpert Ultra-positive, and of these, 18 (24%) would not have pulmonary tuberculosis (false positive); and - 926 would be Xpert Ultra-negative, and of these, 44 (5%) would have tuberculosis (false negative). • where 100 have pulmonary tuberculosis in nasopharyngeal aspirate (by culture): - 66 would be Xpert Ultra-positive, and of these, 22 (33%) would not have pulmonary tuberculosis (false positive); and - 934 would be Xpert Ultra-negative, and of these, 56 (6%) would have tuberculosis (false negative). Detection of rifampicin resistance Xpert Ultra sensitivity was 100% (3 studies, 3 participants; very low-certainty evidence), and specificity range was 97% to 100% (3 studies, 128 participants; low-certainty evidence). Trace results Xpert Ultra trace results, regarded as positive in children by WHO standards, were common. Xpert Ultra specificity remained high in children, despite the frequency of trace results. AUTHORS'
conclusionsWe found Xpert Ultra sensitivity to vary by specimen type, with sputum having the highest sensitivity, followed by gastric aspirate and stool. Nasopharyngeal aspirate had the lowest sensitivity. Xpert Ultra specificity was high against both microbiological and composite reference standards. However, the evidence base is still limited, and findings may be imprecise and vary by study setting. Although we found Xpert Ultra accurate for detection of rifampicin resistance, results were based on a very small number of studies that included only three children with rifampicin resistance. Therefore, findings should be interpreted with caution. Our findings provide support for the use of Xpert Ultra as an initial rapid molecular diagnostic in children being evaluated for tuberculosis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.