Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33217784›Full record

ArticleMycoses2021

Accuracy of galactomannan testing on tracheal aspirates in COVID-19-associated pulmonary aspergillosis.

Carla M Roman-Montes, Areli Martinez-Gamboa, Paulette Diaz-Lomelí, Axel Cervantes-Sanchez, Andrea Rangel-Cordero, Jose Sifuentes-Osornio, Alfredo Ponce-de-Leon, Maria F Gonzalez-Lara

Open access · bronzeAbstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Mycoses, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
37citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

37 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 68 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Comparison of Multi-locus Genotypes Detected inJournal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Carla M Roman-MontesClinical Microbiology Laboratory, Infectious Diseases Department, Instituto Nacional de Ciencias Médicas y Nutrición Salvador Zubirán, Mexico City, Mexico.
Areli Martinez-GamboaClinical Microbiology Laboratory, Infectious Diseases Department, Instituto Nacional de Ciencias Médicas y Nutrición Salvador Zubirán, Mexico City, Mexico.
Paulette Diaz-LomelíClinical Microbiology Laboratory, Infectious Diseases Department, Instituto Nacional de Ciencias Médicas y Nutrición Salvador Zubirán, Mexico City, Mexico.
Axel Cervantes-SanchezClinical Microbiology Laboratory, Infectious Diseases Department, Instituto Nacional de Ciencias Médicas y Nutrición Salvador Zubirán, Mexico City, Mexico.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2279-1558
Andrea Rangel-CorderoClinical Microbiology Laboratory, Infectious Diseases Department, Instituto Nacional de Ciencias Médicas y Nutrición Salvador Zubirán, Mexico City, Mexico.
Jose Sifuentes-OsornioDepartment of Medicine, Instituto Nacional de Ciencias Médicas y Nutrición Salvador Zubirán, Mexico City, Mexico.
Alfredo Ponce-de-LeonClinical Microbiology Laboratory, Infectious Diseases Department, Instituto Nacional de Ciencias Médicas y Nutrición Salvador Zubirán, Mexico City, Mexico.
Maria F Gonzalez-LaraClinical Microbiology Laboratory, Infectious Diseases Department, Instituto Nacional de Ciencias Médicas y Nutrición Salvador Zubirán, Mexico City, Mexico.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0292-3442
Instituto Nacional de Ciencias Médicas y Nutrición Salvador Zubirán · MX

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveOur aim was to evaluate the performance of two galactomannan (GM) assays (Platelia Aspergillus EIA, Bio-Rad

methodsWe included critically ill patients, performed GM-EIA and GM-Lateral Flow Assay (GM-LFA) in TA and followed them until development of COVID-19-associated pulmonary aspergillosis (CAPA) or alternate diagnosis. CAPA was defined according to the modified AspICU criteria in patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection. We estimated sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values for GM-EIA, GM-LFA, the combination of both or either positive results for GM-EIA and GM-LFA. We explored accuracy using different breakpoints, through ROC analysis and Youden index to identify the optimal cut-offs. We described antifungal treatment and 30-day mortality.

resultsWe identified 14/144 (9.7%) patients with CAPA, mean age was 50.35 (SD 11.9), the median time from admission to CAPA was 8 days; 28.5% received tocilizumab and 30-day mortality was 57%. ROC analysis and Youden index identified 2.0 OD as the best cut-off, resulting in sensitivity and specificity of 57.1% and 81.5% for GM-EIA and 60% and 72.6% for GM-LFA, respectively.

conclusionsThe diagnostic performance of GM in tracheal aspirates improved after using a cut-off of 2 OD. Although bronchoalveolar lavage testing is the ideal test, centres with limited access to bronchoscopy may consider this approach to identify or rule out CAPA.

Indexed as

AdultAntifungal AgentsCOVID-19Diabetes ComplicationsFemaleGalactoseHumansMaleMannansMiddle AgedObesityPulmonary AspergillosisSensitivity and SpecificityTracheaAntifungal AgentsgalactomannanGalactoseMannansCOVID-19galactomannaninvasive aspergillosisSARS-CoV-2 infection

Identifiers

PMID33217784
PMCPMC7753336
OpenAlexW3104780464

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.