Skip to main content
. 2022 May;24(5):494–502. doi: 10.1016/j.jmoldx.2022.01.003

Figure 2.

Figure 2

A: Follow-up survey results summarizing thermocycler ramp rates for GenoType MTBDRsl VER 2.0. Two (15%) of 13 initially surveyed laboratories already had their ramp rate set to 2.2°C/second, and five (39%) of 13 were still using a suboptimal ramp rate of ≥2.2°C/second upon resurveying. Six (46%) of 13 laboratories had, since the first survey on GenoType MTBDRplus VER 2.0, changed the GenoType MTBDRsl VER 2.0 ramp rate to the recommended ramp rate. Of these, four (67%) of six reported an improvement in banding intensity and fewer invalid results. B: An illustrative example of differences in banding patterns (and consequences for patient diagnoses) caused using suboptimal ramp rate. In example 1, at the suboptimal ramp rate (4.0°C/second), no tuberculosis or drug susceptibility information would be generated. In example 2, at the suboptimal ramp rate (4.0°C/second), again no drug susceptibility information would be generated, but, in this case, it would lead to a missed diagnosis of fluoroquinolone (FQ) resistance. Different banding patterns between strips are shown with a red line. SLID, second-line injectables; TUB-band–positive, positive for Mycobacterium tuberculosis–complex-DNA.