ArticleCureus2023
The Role of Bronchoalveolar Lavage in the Diagnosis of COVID-19 Pneumonia: A Report of Three Cases.
Article in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
- Biomarkers of pulmonary fibrosis in bronchoalveolar lavage fluid and saliva. Study methods and pathophysiological significance.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) initially infects and replicates in epithelial cells of the nasopharynx where there are relatively high levels of angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 receptor, which correlates with the highest sensitivity time point of the nasopharyngeal swab (NPS) real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) during the first week, with subsequent decline thereafter. As viral shedding progresses throughout the respiratory tract, the virus can be detectable for up to 30 days in bronchoalveolar fluids. This report presents three cases of acute respiratory distress in the setting of multifocal pneumonia, with multiple false-negative NPS SARS-CoV-2/RT-PCR but positive SARS-CoV-2/RT-PCR in bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) samples. Molecular RT-PCR testing remains the gold standard in the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection. However, the diagnostic accuracy of NPS RT-PCR may be affected by several factors. SARS-CoV-2/RT-PCR in BAL samples increases the diagnostic yield for coronavirus disease 2019 pneumonia; however, it is not widely available in many institutions and can be clinically challenging to perform. A multimodal approach is required for prompt diagnosis, especially in patients with a progressive disease, where a delay in therapy can be clinically detrimental.
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.