ReviewFolia microbiologica2012
Laboratory diagnostics of invasive fungal infections: an overview with emphasis on molecular approach.
Review in Folia microbiologica, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Deep fungal infections diagnosed by histology in Uganda: a 70-year retrospective study.Medical mycology · 2020Article
- Visible DNA Microarray System as an Adjunctive Molecular Test in Identification of Pathogenic Fungi Directly from a Blood Culture Bottle.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2018Article
- Utility of bronchoalveolar lavage in diagnosing respiratory tract infections in patients with hematological malignancies: are invasive diagnostics still needed?Upsala journal of medical sciences · 2017Article
- Uncommon opportunistic fungal infections of oral cavity: A review.Journal of oral and maxillofacial pathology : JOMFP · 2014Review
- Establishment and application of real-time quantitative PCR for diagnosing invasive aspergillosis via the blood in hematological patients: targeting a specific sequence of Aspergillus 28S-ITS2.BMC infectious diseases · 2013Article
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
Although invasive fungal diseases (IFDs) are relatively rare, they have become an increasingly common life-threatening complication in a variety of critically ill patients. Due to changes in treatment strategies, patterns of IFDs have changed substantially as well. Yeast infections have shifted toward a higher proportion of non-albicans Candida species, but their overall incidence has remained stable. In contrast, IFDs caused by molds, including particularly various species of Aspergillus, Fusarium, and Mucorales, have increased in number. In view of the growing incidence and the high mortality rates of IFDs, accurate diagnostic techniques permitting timely onset of adequate antifungal treatment are of paramount importance. Although conventional approaches such as microscopy, cultivation, histopathological examination, and imaging methods still represent the gold standard, the diagnosis remains difficult because of limited sensitivity and specificity. Noninvasive and culture-independent diagnostic techniques, including fungal antigen detection, and different molecular-based techniques are becoming increasingly important. Of the fungal surrogate markers such as cell wall components, galactomannan and (1,3)-β-D-glucan by commercially available diagnostic kits have become widely used, but the results are still controversial. A plethora of PCR-based diagnostic methods targeting different gene regions and exploiting a variety of amplicon detection tools have been published. Molecular assays have the capacity to overcome the limitations of other diagnostic approaches, but the current lack of methodological standardization and validation, together with not always clear interpretation of the results, has prevented broad application in the clinical setting.
Indexed as
Identifiers
22566119What 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.