4.6 Review

Evaluation of PCR in Bronchoalveolar Lavage Fluid for Diagnosis of Pneumocystis jirovecii Pneumonia: A Bivariate Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review

期刊

PLOS ONE
卷 8, 期 9, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0073099

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Science Foundation of China [NSFC81170003]
  2. Shanghai Pujiang Project [12PJD004]
  3. Shanghai Elite Medical Talent Project [XYQ2011006]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: As a promising tool, PCR in bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BALF) has not been accepted as a diagnostic criterion for PJP. Objective: We undertook a systematic review of published studies to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of PCR assays in BALF for PJP. Methods: Eligible studies from PubMed, Embase and Web of Science reporting PCR assays in BALF for diagnosing PJP were identified. A bivariate meta-analysis of the method's sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative likelihood ratios with a 95% confidence interval (CI) were analyzed. The post-test probability was performed to evaluate clinical usefulness. A summary receiver operating characteristics (SROC) curve was used to evaluate overall performance. Subgroup analyses were carried out to analysis the potential heterogeneity. Results: Sixteen studies published between 1994 and 2012 were included. The summary sensitivity and specificity values (95% CI) of PCR in BALF for diagnosis of PJP were 98.3% (91.3%-99.7%) and 91.0% (82.7%-95.5%), respectively. The positive and negative likelihood ratios were 10.894 (5.569-21.309) and 0.018 (0.003-0.099), respectively. In a setting of 20% prevalence of PJP, the probability of PJP would be over 3-fold if the BALF-PCR test was positive, and the probability of PJP would be less than 0.5% if it was negative. The area under the SROC curve was 0.98 (0.97-0.99). Conclusions: The method of PCR in BALF shows high sensitivity and good specificity for the diagnosis of PJP. However, clinical practice for the diagnosis of PJP should consider the consistent respiratory symptoms, radiographic changes and laboratory findings of the suspected patients.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据