ArticleFolia microbiologica2019
Detection and identification of fungi in bronchoalveolar lavage fluid from immunocompromised patients using panfungal PCR.
Article in Folia microbiologica, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Rational design of antibodies and development of a novel method for (1-3)-β-D glucan detection as an alternative to Limulus amebocyte lysate assay.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2024Article
- Development and evaluation of a novel fast broad-range PCR and sequencing assay (FBR-PCR/S) using dual priming oligonucleotides targeting the ITS/LSU gene regions for rapid diagnosis of invasive fungal diseases: multi-year experience in a large Canadian healthcare zone.BMC infectious diseases · 2022Article
- Biosensors and Diagnostics for Fungal Detection.Journal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Review
- Lipid composition and cell surface hydrophobicity of Candida albicans influence the efficacy of fluconazole-gentamicin treatment.Yeast (Chichester, England) · 2020Article
- Detection ofJournal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Rapid diagnostics of fungal pneumonia and initiation of appropriate therapy are still challenging. In this study, we used two panfungal assays to test bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BALF) samples to prove their ability to confirm invasive fungal disease diagnosis and identify causative agents. Two methods targeting different fungal rDNA regions were used, and the obtained PCR products were sequenced directly or after cloning. In total, 106 BALF samples from 104 patients were tested. After sequencing, we obtained 578 sequences. Four hundred thirty-seven sequences were excluded from further analysis due to duplication (n = 335) or similarity with sequences detected in the extraction control sample (n = 102); 141 unique sequences were analyzed. Altogether, 23/141 (16%) of the fungi detected belonged to pathogenic species, and 63/141 (45%) were identified as various yeasts; a variety of environmental or very rare fungal human pathogens represented 29/141 (21%) of the total and 26/141 (18%) were described as uncultured fungus. Panfungal PCR detected fungal species that would be missed by specific methods in only one case (probable cryptococcosis). Panfungal PCR followed by sequencing has limited use for testing BALF samples due to frequent commensal or environmental fungal species pickup.
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.