SynthesisBMJ open respiratory research2025
No difference in microbial diversity between bronchoalveolar lavage and tracheal sampling: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMJ open respiratory research, 2025. 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.
- Beyond Pathogens: Modulating the Commensal Microbiota to Reshape Immunity for Respiratory Disease Intervention.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Basic Microbiome Analysis: Analytical Steps from Sampling to Sequencing.Microorganisms · 2026Review
- A Systematic Review of Bacterial Sampling Collection for Veterinary Microbiology in Companion Animals.Veterinary sciences · 2026Review
- Crosstalk between the microbiome and the mucosal immunoglobulin A system in the lung, in health and disease.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2026Review
- The lung microbiome and asthma: from inflammatory phenotype differentiation to microbe-based immunomodulatory strategies.Frontiers in immunology · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe respiratory microbiome has a vital role in maintaining respiratory health and preventing pathogen colonisation, but traditional diagnostic methods fail to capture a complete picture of it. Metagenomic sequencing has improved our understanding of microbial ecosystems in both acute and chronic pathologies. However, its results have not been systematically compared between different respiratory sampling techniques, as has been done with traditional methods. Our study aims to compare the microbial diversity in bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) and tracheal samples using microbiome sequencing.
methodsA systematic search was conducted in Medline, Embase and CENTRAL databases to identify studies where lower respiratory tract microbiome specimens were collected simultaneously using BAL and tracheal sampling and diversity was analysed postsequencing. Risk of bias was assessed with our specifically tailored tool. A random-effects model was used for data synthesis, analysing pooled Shannon, Chao1 and Simpson indices.
resultsWe screened 1050 potentially relevant publications, 10 of which were included. No significant difference was found in microbial alpha diversity between BAL and tracheal samples. The subgroup analysis of tracheal sample types, including sputum and endotracheal aspirate, revealed no significant differences compared with BAL.
conclusionsTracheal sampling methods offer a viable and less invasive alternative to BAL for characterising microbiome alpha diversity in clinical or research settings where segmental sampling is not required. However, further high-quality comparative studies are needed to confirm these findings. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42023436934.
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.