Tuberculosis is the leading cause of death globally from a single infectious agent. Early diagnosis is critical to reducing morbimortality. In cases of negative smear microscopy or limited sputum production, bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) samples offer an alternative for diagnosis. Culture, the gold standard, requires a high bacterial load, extensive infrastructure and is time-consuming. Xpert MTB/RIF provides faster results with a higher cost. Previous systematic reviews present substantial limitations, including significant heterogeneity. Therefore, the diagnostic utility of Xpert MTB/RIF using BAL samples in adults with negative or scant sputum for pulmonary tuberculosis (PTB) needs to be reassessed.

A systematic search of MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS and Web of Science will be conducted without language or publication date restriction. Cross-sectional diagnostic studies of negative or sputum-scarce adults with presumptive PTB who underwent bronchoscopy to obtain samples for Xpert MTB/RIF and culture will be included. Screening and data extraction will be performed independently. Methodological quality will be assessed using the QUADAS-2 tool. A bivariate hierarchical random-effects model will synthesise sensitivity and specificity. Meta-analysis will be performed using Meta-DiSc 2.0. Heterogeneity will be assessed using I² and Cochrane thresholds. Subgroup analyses will be performed based on study design, population differences, country, culture method and risk of bias. Publication bias will be investigated using a funnel plot. The certainty of evidence will be evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. There was no patient or public involvement in the development of the systematic review protocol.

Ethical approval is not required as this study will use publicly available data. Findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publication.

CRD42025639440.

Acute abdominal pain is a chief complaint in emergency departments and represents 7%–10% of emergency room (ER) visits. Acute appendicitis represents 15% of the causes of abdominal pain and 62% of the causes that require surgical treatment. Opioid analgesia has been evaluated in clinical trials, and they have determined it does not impact diagnostic accuracy. Despite evidence, withholding analgesia is still a common practice. Pain severely impacts quality of life and analgesia has become essential in humanised medicine. We aim to determine the safety and effectiveness of different opioid regimens for adult patients that present to the ER with acute suspected appendicitis.

We will search MEDLINE and Embase via Ovid, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials without restrictions on the study publication date. Screening, extraction and risk of bias assessment will be performed in duplicate. We will use the Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment Tool. We will perform both pairwise meta-analysis and network meta-analysis (NMA) if transitivity and coherence principles are met. Heterogeneity will be evaluated using the I² and ² and using the thresholds recommended by Cochrane. We will perform sensitivity analysis based on the pre-established potential effect modifiers, risk of bias and data that required transformation or imputation. Publication bias will be addressed by using funnel plots on a pairwise level. We will assess the strength of the body of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach (GRADE) per outcome, and evidence from the NMA will be assessed using the GRADE approach for NMA.

Approval by an ethics committee is not required for this study since no personal information will be handled. Information will be disseminated by publication on a peer-reviewed journal.

CRD42024583804.