ArticleCurrent infectious disease reports2011
Biopsy procedures for molecular tissue diagnosis of invasive fungal infections.
Article in Current infectious disease reports, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Current challenges in the microbiological diagnosis of invasive aspergillosis.Mycopathologia · 2014Review
- A long-term survivor of disseminated Aspergillus and mucorales infection: an instructive case.Mycopathologia · 2014Article
- Performance of panfungal--and specific-PCR-based procedures for etiological diagnosis of invasive fungal diseases on tissue biopsy specimens with proven infection: a 7-year retrospective analysis from a reference laboratory.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The incidence of invasive fungal infections (IFI) has increased substantially and the epidemiology has changed dramatically in recent years. Candida albicans is still most important, but non-albicans species, Aspergillus species, Glomeromycota (formerly Zygomycetes) and Fusarium species are an increasing cause of IFIs. Due to this growing diversity, the identification of the causative organism to genus and species level is important to perform best and adequate treatment. The early, sensitive and specific detection of IFIs remains challenging and current conventional methods are limited. The golden standard for the definite diagnosis of proven pulmonary infection remains either histopathologic, cytopathologic or direct tissue examination. Invasive procedures are necessary to obtain reliable specimens and biopsies may be taken percutaneously, bronchoscopically, via open surgery or via video-assisted thorascopic surgery. Molecular methods, like PCR or in situ hybridization, are a promising diagnostic tool for rapid and reliable species identification and should be performed in addition to microscopic examination and culture to increase the sensitivity for the diagnosis of IFI. Combining culture, microscopy, serology, and PCR in lung tissues and/or bronchial samples will increase the diagnostic yield by 99%. Here, we give an overview of biopsy procedures for molecular tissue diagnosis of IFI.
Identifiers
21948145What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.