ArticleOpen medicine (Warsaw, Poland)2026
Comparison of mNGS microbial detection profiles between percutaneous lung aspiration biopsy and bronchoalveolar lavage fluid in infective pneumonia.
Article in Open medicine (Warsaw, Poland), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: To compare the mNGS-based microbial detection profiles of percutaneous lung aspiration biopsy (PLAB) and bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BALF) in patients with infective pneumonia under real-world clinical sampling strategies. Methods: The study included 166 patients with infective pneumonia, of whom 54 underwent PLAB to obtain unfixed fresh lung tissue from the lesion site, while 112 underwent fiberoptic bronchoscopy to obtain BALF. Results: In the BALF group, 3 pathogens of high concern and 5 suspected pathogens, totaling 8 types of pathogens, were detected. In contrast, in the PLAB group, 1 pathogen of high concern and 1 suspected pathogen, totaling 2 types of pathogens were detected. Cumulatively, 348 pathogens were identified in the BALF group. In the PLAB group, 96 pathogens were identified cumulatively, p<0.001. In the BALF group, the most frequently detected pathogen was Conclusions: BALF and PLAB showed different mNGS microbial detection patterns under different clinical sampling strategies. Because of the retrospective non-paired design, these findings should be interpreted as descriptive comparative data rather than proof of the superior diagnostic performance of either sampling method.
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.