Key result
PCR correctly diagnosed tuberculous pericarditis in 81% of patients compared to 93% by culture, with significantly higher sensitivity in tissue (80%) than in pericardial fluid (15%; P=0.002).
Why the study?
Does PCR accurately diagnose tuberculous pericarditis compared to culture and histopathology in patients with pericarditis?
Population
20 patients with pericarditis, providing 36 specimens of pericardial fluid and 19 specimens of pericardial…
Comparison
PCR with IS6110-based primers specific for the… vs Culture and histopathology
Design
Cross-sectional
Authors
Loading...
Fluid PCR should not yet replace culture; leaves open prospective validation of tissue PCR for rapid diagnosis.
Observational (n=20)
Does PCR accurately diagnose tuberculous pericarditis compared to culture and histopathology in patients with pericarditis?
Absolute Event Rate: 50% vs 70%
p-value: p=> 0.15
PCR offers a rapid diagnostic alternative for tuberculous pericarditis with good accuracy in tissue specimens, though its sensitivity in pericardial fluid is poor.
Cegielski et al. (1997) conducted an observational in Tuberculous pericarditis (n=20). PCR vs. Culture and histopathology was evaluated on Identification of M. tuberculosis per specimen (p=> 0.15). PCR correctly diagnosed tuberculous pericarditis in 81% of patients compared to 93% by culture, with significantly higher sensitivity in tissue (80%) than in pericardial fluid (15%; P=0.002).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: