ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2015
FilmArray Respiratory Panel Assay: Comparison of Nasopharyngeal Swabs and Bronchoalveolar Lavage Samples.
Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
33 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Comparison of detection rate of 16 sampling methods for respiratory viruses: a Bayesian network meta-analysis of clinical data and systematic review.BMJ global health · 2020Pooled it
- Epidemiological analysis of respiratory pathogen detection in 11 regions of Yunnan from 2021 to 2023.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Utility and Safety of Bronchoalveolar Lavage for Diagnosis and Management of Respiratory Illnesses in Immunocompromised Children.Journal of the Pediatric Infectious Diseases Society · 2025Article
- Agreement of respiratory viruses' detection between nasopharyngeal swab and bronchoalveolar lavage in adults admitted for pneumonia: a retrospective study.Clinical microbiology and infection : the official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases · 2023Article
- Article
- Prepandemic viral community-acquired pneumonia: Diagnostic sensitivity and specificity of nasopharyngeal swabs and performance of clinical severity scores.Journal of medical virology · 2023Observational
- Metagenomic next-generation sequencing for detecting lower respiratory tract infections in sputum and bronchoalveolar lavage fluid samples from children.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2023Article
- Lower Respiratory Tract Coinfection in the ICU: Prevalence and Clinical Significance of Coinfection Detected via Microbiological Analysis of Bronchoalveolar Lavage Fluid With a Comparison of Invasive Methodologies.Critical care explorations · 2022Article
- Respiratory viral infections in pragmatically selected adults in intensive care units.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- The clinical application of Filmarray respiratory panel in children especially with severe respiratory tract infections.BMC infectious diseases · 2021Article
- Bacterial and viral co-infections in patients with severe SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia admitted to a French ICU.Annals of intensive care · 2020Article
- Repeat Molecular Testing for Respiratory Pathogens: Diagnostic Gain or Diminishing Returns?The journal of applied laboratory medicine · 2020Article
- Multicenter Evaluation of the BioFire FilmArray Pneumonia/Pneumonia Plus Panel for Detection and Quantification of Agents of Lower Respiratory Tract Infection.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2020Article
- Rapid detection of respiratory organisms with FilmArray respiratory panel and its impact on clinical decisions in Shanghai, China, 2016-2018.Influenza and other respiratory viruses · 2020Article
- Suspension microarray-based comparison of oropharyngeal swab and bronchoalveolar lavage fluid for pathogen identification in young children hospitalized with respiratory tract infection.BMC infectious diseases · 2020Article
- Predictive Value of Respiratory Viral Detection in the Upper Respiratory Tract for Infection of the Lower Respiratory Tract With Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation.The Journal of infectious diseases · 2020Article
- Bronchoalveolar lavage to evaluate new pulmonary infiltrates in allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant recipients: impact on antimicrobial optimization.Infection prevention in practice · 2019Article
- FilmArray respiratory panel assay: An effective method for detecting viral and atypical bacterial pathogens in bronchoscopy specimens.Diagnostic microbiology and infectious disease · 2019Article
- The clinical impact of pneumocystis and viral PCR testing on bronchoalveolar lavage in immunosuppressed patients.Respiratory medicine · 2018Article
- The GenMark ePlexFuture microbiology · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The FilmArray respiratory panel (FARP) reliably and rapidly identifies 17 viruses and 3 bacterial pathogens. A nasopharyngeal swab FARP (NP FARP) is performed for many patients with respiratory symptoms. For patients who are acutely ill or immunocompromised or fail to improve, a bronchoalveolar lavage sample FARP (BAL FARP) is performed in addition to the NP FARP. To date, no studies have compared the yield of a BAL FARP with that of an NP FARP. We retrospectively studied all patients who had a BAL FARP within 7 days after an NP FARP between June 2013 and May 2014. Demographic information, comorbidities, FARP results, and all microbiologic data from BAL fluid were collected. Eighty-six patients had a BAL FARP performed within 7 days (mean, 1.6; median, 1) after an NP FARP. Of these, 66 (77%) had concordant BAL and NP FARP results: 15 (23%) had the same pathogen identified from the NP and BAL FARPs, and 51 (77%) had concordant negative FARP results. In 18 of the 86 patients (21%), a pathogen was detected from the NP FARP; of these, 15 (83%) had a concordant match on a subsequent BAL FARP, and the remaining 3 had negative BAL FARPs. In 17 of the 86 patients (20%), pathogens were identified from the BAL FARPs that were not detected by the NP FARPs; of these, 16 (94%) had initial negative NP FARPs. The data suggest that once a pathogen is identified by an NP FARP, a subsequent BAL FARP is unlikely to add new microbiologic information. However, a BAL FARP may provide new, useful microbiologic information when performed within 7 days after a negative NP FARP.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.