Background Tuberculosis (TB) is the world’s leading infectious cause of death. Extrapulmonary TB accounts for 15% of TB cases, but the proportion is increasing, and over half a million people were newly diagnosed with rifampicin‐resistant TB in 2016. Xpert® MTB/RIF (Xpert) is a World Health Organization (WHO)‐recommended, rapid, automated, nucleic acid amplification assay that is used widely for simultaneous detection of Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex and rifampicin resistance in sputum specimens. This Cochrane Review assessed the accuracy of Xpert in extrapulmonary specimens. Objectives To determine the diagnostic accuracy of Xpert a) for extrapulmonary TB by site of disease in people presumed to have extrapulmonary TB; and b) for rifampicin resistance in people presumed to have extrapulmonary TB. Search methods We searched the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register, MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index, Web of Science, Latin American Caribbean Health Sciences Literature (LILACS), Scopus, ClinicalTrials.gov, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, the International Standard Randomized Controlled Trial Number (ISRCTN) Registry, and ProQuest up to 7 August 2017 without language restriction. Selection criteria We included diagnostic accuracy studies of Xpert in people presumed to have extrapulmonary TB. We included TB meningitis and pleural, lymph node, bone or joint, genitourinary, peritoneal, pericardial, and disseminated TB. We used culture as the reference standard. For pleural TB, we also included a composite reference standard, which defined a positive result as the presence of granulomatous inflammation or a positive culture result. For rifampicin resistance, we used culture‐based drug susceptibility testing or MTBDRplus as the reference standard. Data collection and analysis Two review authors independently extracted data, assessed risk of bias and applicability using the QUADAS‐2 tool. We determined pooled predicted sensitivity and specificity for TB, grouped by type of extrapulmonary specimen, and for rifampicin resistance. For TB detection, we used a bivariate random‐effects model. Recognizing that use of culture may lead to misclassification of cases of extrapulmonary TB as ‘not TB' owing to the paucibacillary nature of the disease, we adjusted accuracy estimates by applying a latent class meta‐analysis model. For rifampicin resistance detection, we performed univariate meta‐analyses for sensitivity and specificity separately to include studies in which no rifampicin resistance was detected. We used theoretical populations with an assumed prevalence to provide illustrative numbers of patients with false positive and false negative results. Main results We included 66 unique studies that evaluated 16,213 specimens for detection of extrapulmonary TB and rifampicin resistance. We identified only one study that evaluated the newest test version, Xpert MTB/RIF Ultra (Ultra), for TB meningitis. Fifty studies (76%) took place in low‐ or middle‐income countries. Risk of bias was low for patient selection, index test, and flow and timing domains and was high or unclear for the reference standard domain (most of these studies decontaminated sterile specimens before culture inoculation). Regarding applicability, in the patient selection domain, we scored high or unclear concern for most studies because either patients were evaluated exclusively as inpatients at tertiary care centres, or we were not sure about the clinical settings. Pooled Xpert sensitivity (defined by culture) varied across different types of specimens (31% in pleural tissue to 97% in bone or joint fluid); Xpert sensitivity was > 80% in urine and bone or joint fluid and tissue. Pooled Xpert specificity (defined by culture) varied less than sensitivity (82% in bone or joint tissue to 99% in pleural fluid and urine). Xpert specificity was ≥ 98% in cerebrospinal fluid, pleural fluid, urine, and peritoneal fluid. Xpert testing in cerebrospinal fluid Xpert pooled sensitivity and specificity (95% credible interval (CrI)) against culture were 71.1% (60.9% to 80.4%) and 98.0% (97.0% to 98.8%), respectively (29 studies, 3774 specimens; moderate‐certainty evidence). For a population of 1000 people where 100 have TB meningitis on culture, 89 would be Xpert‐positive: of these, 18 (20%) would not have TB (false‐positives); and 911 would be Xpert‐negative: of these, 29 (3%) would have TB (false‐negatives). For TB meningitis, ultra sensitivity and specificity against culture (95% confidence interval (CI)) were 90% (55% to 100%) and 90% (83% to 95%), respectively (one study, 129 participants). Xpert testing in pleural fluid Xpert pooled sensitivity and specificity (95% CrI) against culture were 50.9% (39.7% to 62.8%) and 99.2% (98.2% to 99.7%), respectively (27 studies, 4006 specimens; low‐certainty evidence). For a population of 1000 people where 150 have pleural TB on culture, 83 would be Xpert‐positive: of these, seven (8%) would not have TB (false‐positives); and 917 would be Xpert‐negative: of these, 74 (8%) would have TB (false‐negatives). Xpert testing in urine Xpert pooled sensitivity and specificity (95% CrI) against culture were 82.7% (69.6% to 91.1%) and 98.7% (94.8% to 99.7%), respectively (13 studies, 1199 specimens; moderate‐certainty evidence). For a population of 1000 people where 70 have genitourinary TB on culture, 70 would be Xpert‐positive: of these, 12 (17%) would not have TB (false‐positives); and 930 would be Xpert‐negative: of these, 12 (1%) would have TB (false‐negatives). Xpert testing for rifampicin resistance Xpert pooled sensitivity (20 studies, 148 specimens) and specificity (39 studies, 1088 specimens) were 95.0% (89.7% to 97.9%) and 98.7% (97.8% to 99.4%), respectively (high‐certainty evidence). For a population of 1000 people where 120 have rifampicin‐resistant TB, 125 would be positive for rifampicin‐resistant TB: of these, 11 (9%) would not have rifampicin resistance (false‐positives); and 875 would be negative for rifampicin‐resistant TB: of these, 6 (1%) would have rifampicin resistance (false‐negatives). For lymph node TB, the accuracy of culture, the reference standard used, presented a greater concern for bias than in other forms of extrapulmonary TB. Authors' conclusions In people presumed to have extrapulmonary TB, Xpert may be helpful in confirming the diagnosis. Xpert sensitivity varies across different extrapulmonary specimens, while for most specimens, specificity is high, the test rarely yielding a positive result for people without TB (defined by culture). Xpert is accurate for detection of rifampicin resistance. For people with presumed TB meningitis, treatment should be based on clinical judgement, and not withheld solely on an Xpert result, as is common practice when culture results are negative.
