Evidence Hub

Performance of Various Pelvic-Derived Samples for the Diagnosis of Female Genital Tract Tuberculosis by Conventional and Molecular Methods: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Palo S, Rawat S, Mishra D, Mishra M

Cureus, 2025

3 citations

Abstract

Female genital tuberculosis (FGTB) is a challenging extrapulmonary manifestation of tuberculosis, often presenting with nonspecific symptoms and a paucibacillary profile, complicating diagnosis. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the diagnostic performance of various pelvic-derived samples using conventional and molecular tests. A comprehensive literature search was conducted across multiple databases from inception up to August 2024, following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Studies assessing the sensitivity, specificity, or positivity rates of tests such as Ziehl-Neelsen (ZN) staining, culture, histopathology, polymerase chain reaction (PCR), and GeneXpert MTB/RIF on samples including endometrial biopsy, aspirates, menstrual blood, and peritoneal fluid were included. Meta-analysis using bivariate random-effects models was undertaken where feasible. Endometrial samples were the most commonly evaluated among the included studies. ZN staining and culture demonstrated high specificity (pooled specificity: 1.00) but poor sensitivity (ZN: 10%; culture: 23%). Histopathology exhibited variable sensitivity (2.56-75%) and high specificity (98%). PCR showed pooled sensitivity and specificity of 54% and 97%, respectively, with considerable heterogeneity. GeneXpert demonstrated excellent specificity (pooled 100%) but low sensitivity (14%). Menstrual blood and pelvic washings were explored with variable results;…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free