Evaluation of GeneXpert vanA/vanB in the early diagnosis of vancomycin-resistant enterococci infection.

PURPOSE: Vancomycin-resistant enterococci infection is a worrying worldwide clinical problem. To evaluate the accuracy of GeneXpert vanA/vanB in the diagnosis of VRE, we conducted a systematic review in the study. METHODS: Experimental data were extracted from publications until May 03 2021 related to the diagnostic accuracy of GeneXpert vanA/vanB for VRE in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library. The accuracy of GeneXpert vanA/vanB for VRE was evaluated using summary receiver to operate characteristic curve, pooled sensitivity, pooled specificity, positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio, and diagnostic odds ratio. RESULTS: 8 publications were divided into 3 groups according to two golden standard references, vanA and vanB group, vanA group, vanB group, including 6 researches, 5 researches and 5 researches, respectively. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of group vanA and vanB were 0.96 (95% CI, 0.93-0.98) and 0.90 (95% CI, 0.88-0.91) respectively. The DOR was 440.77 (95% CI, 37.92-5123.55). The pooled sensitivity and specificity of group vanA were 0.86 (95% CI, 0.81-0.90) and 0.99 (95% CI, 0.99-0.99) respectively, and those of group vanB were 0.85 (95% CI, 0.63-0.97) and 0.82 (95% CI, 0.80-0.83) respectively. CONCLUSION: GeneXpert vanA/vanB can diagnose VRE with high-accuracy and shows greater accuracy in diagnosing vanA.

Evaluation of Xpert GBS assay and Xpert GBS LB assay for detection of Streptococcus agalactiae.

BACKGROUND: Group B Streptococcal (GBS) infection is the primary agent of neonatal morbidity and mortality. Rapid and simple methods to detect GBS are Xpert GBS and GBS LB assays based on real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR). However, since the diagnostic accuracy of the two techniques in diagnosing GBS remains unclear, we designed this study to appraise the diagnostic accuracy of the aforementioned. METHODS: A systematic search of all literature published before July 16, 2020 was conducted using Embase, PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library. The study quality was evaluated through Review Manager 5.3. Accordingly, data extracted in the included studies were analyzed using Meta-DiSc 1.4 and Stata 12.0 software. The diagnosis odds ratio (DOR) and bivariate boxplot were utilized to evaluate the heterogeneity. Publication bias was appraised by using Deeks' funnel plot. RESULTS: A total of 13 studies were adopted and only 19 sets of data met the criteria. The sensitivity and specificity of Xpert GBS were 0.91 (95% CI 0.89-0.92) and 0.93 (95% CI 0.92-0.94). The area under the curve (AUC) was 0.9806. The sensitivity and specificity results of Xpert GBS LB were 0.96 (95% CI 0.95-0.98) and 0.94 (95% CI 0.92-0.95), respectively. The AUC was 0.9950. No publication bias was found. CONCLUSIONS: The Xpert GBS and GBS LB assays are valuable alternative methods with high sensitivity and specificity. However, determining whether they can be used as clinical diagnostic standards for GBS is essential for the future.