Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 18, 2025
Diagnosing Pulmonary Tuberculosis with the Xpert MTB/RIF Test
Published on: April 9, 2012
Analysis of unsuccessful tests and the effect of prolonged clinical sample preprocessing in the GeneXpert MTB/RIF
Jian-Hao Wei1, Xue-Qin Qian2, Yan-Min Wan3
1Department of Laboratory Medicine, Shanghai Geriatric Medical Center, Zhongshan Hospital Minhang Meilong, Fudan University, Shanghai, China.
Background:
The GeneXpert MTB/RIF (Xpert) assay is a widely used technology for detecting Mycobacterium tuberculosis (MTB) in clinical samples. However, the study on the failure of the Xpert assay during routine implementation and its potential solutions is limited.
Methods:
We retrospectively analyzed the records of unsuccessful tests in the Xpert and the GeneXpert MTB/RIF Ultra (Ultra) assays between April 2017 and April 2021 at the Shanghai Public Health Clinical Center. To further investigate the effect of prolonged preprocessing on clinical sputum, an additional 120 sputum samples were collected for Xpert testing after 15 min, 3 h, and 6 h preprocessing. The analysis was performed by SPSS version 19.0 software.
Results:
A total of 11,314 test records were analyzed, of which 268 (2.37%) had unsuccessful test results. Among these, 221 (1.95%) were reported as "Error", 43 (0.38%) as "Invalid", and 4 (0.04%) as "No result". The most common clinical specimen for Xpert tests was sputum, accounting for 114 (2.17%) unsuccessful tests. The failure rate of urine specimens was lower than that of sputum (OR = 0.12, 95% CI: 0.02-0.88, χ2 = 6.22, p = 0.021). In contrast, the failure rate of stool specimens was approximately twice as high as that of sputum (OR = 1.93, 95% CI: 1.09-3.40, χ2 = 5.35, p = 0.014). In the prolonged preprocessing experiment, 102 cases (85%) yielded consistent results in Xpert tests. Furthermore, 7 cases (5.83%) detected an increase in MTB load, 8 cases (6.67%) detected a decrease in MTB load, and 3 cases (2.5%) yielded incongruent results in MTB and rifampicin resistance detection.
Conclusions:
The primary cause of unsuccessful tests in the Xpert assay was reported as "Error". Despite varying failure rates depending on the samples, the Xpert assay can be applied to extrapulmonary samples. For paucibacillary specimens, retesting the remaining preprocessed mixture should be carefully considered.
