ArticlePediatric research2024
Clinical and metagenomic characteristics of lymphadenopathy related to fever of unknown origin in children.
Article in Pediatric research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diagnostic value of basic and extended procedures in pediatric fever of unknown origin - results of a nation-wide surveillance study.Molecular and cellular pediatrics · 2026Article
- Concurrent Burkholderia cepacia detected by plasma mcfDNA sequencing in a child with MRSA liver abscess and chronic granulomatous disease: a case report.BMC pediatrics · 2026Article
- Diagnostic Value of Lymph Node Biopsy in Adult Patients with Classic Fever of Unknown Origin Accompanied by Lymphadenopathy.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDiagnosis of fever of unknown origin remains challenge for pediatricians. Lymphadenopathy is a separate entity that mainly originates from infection or malignancy.
methods168 patients with FUO accompanied by lymphadenectasis were reviewed. 33 lymph node tissue samples were examined by mNGS. Differences in clinical characteristics were compared among different disease groups. The value of mNGS in diagnosing and improving the clinical situation was assessed.
resultsMultivariate analysis revealed that hepatosplenomegaly and LDH levels were associated with infectious diseases. Arthralgia was correlated with non-infectious inflammatory diseases. Weight loss and a node located in supraclavicular region may indicate neoplastic diseases. mNGS-positive rate was 60.60%, higher than that obtained with traditional methods. Treatment for 3/4 patients was adjusted according to the pathogen detected by mNGS, and antibiotics uses was discontinued or degraded in over 1/2 of the patients according to mNGS results.
conclusionsClinical characteristics of children with lymphadenopathy related to FUO have limited diagnostic value for distinguishing different kinds of diseases, while mNGS of lymph node tissue serves as a useful tool for identifying infectious diseases, especially those caused by rare pathogens. mNGS results can lead to not only adjustments in targeted treatment but also further confirmation of underlying diseases. IMPACT STATEMENT: 1. The clinical features of children with FUO and lymphadenopathy differ according to disease group,although multivariate analysis indicated little diagnostic value for these features. 2. mNGS on lymph node tissue from children with FUO may serve as a efficient tool for distinguishing infectious diseases from other diseases. This is especially useful when a diagnosis cannot be determined with traditional methods. 3. mNGS targeted treatment can be administered in a timely manner and some underlying diseases can be indicated.
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.