Muthu Valliappan, Agarwal Ritesh, Dhooria Sahajal, Sehgal Inderpaul Singh, Prasad Kuruswamy Thurai, Rudramurthy Shivaprakash M, Aggarwal Ashutosh N, Chakrabarti Arunaloke
Department of Pulmonary Medicine, Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research (PGIMER), Chandigarh, 160012, India.
Department of Medical Microbiology, Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh, 160012, India.
Mycopathologia. 2025 Sep 17;190(5):88. doi: 10.1007/s11046-025-00996-w.
The utility of polymerase chain reaction (PCR) for diagnosing mucormycosis is uncertain. We conducted a diagnostic test accuracy meta-analysis to determine the performance of Mucorales PCR.
We systematically reviewed PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Central databases to identify studies reporting Mucorales PCR (blood or bronchoalveolar lavage fluid [BALF] samples) in at least 10 suspected mucormycosis cases. We pooled sensitivity and specificity using Bayesian (weak and two informative priors) and frequentist methods. Subgroup analyses included middle vs. high-income countries, risk factors (hematological diseases vs. others), study design, assay type (commercial vs. in-house), and testing protocol (serial testing vs. single-time PCR). We assessed the effect of the number of blood tests performed per participant on sensitivity using multivariable meta-regression.
We identified 1524 citations, of which 36 studies (41 datasets, n = 6627 participants; 16,613 samples) were included. The pooled sensitivity and specificity (with 95% credible interval) by Bayesian weak priors (primary analysis) were 51% (34-67%) and 97% (95-98%) for blood; 64% (50-76%) and 97% (95-98%) for BALF samples. We found wide variation in sensitivity, with a 14% increment for every additional blood sample tested per patient. Studies from middle-income countries reported a significantly lower pooled sensitivity (31 vs. 68%) in blood samples and lower specificity in BALF (72 vs. 98%) than high-income countries. No other subgroups showed significant differences.
Mucorales PCR was highly specific but poorly sensitive in blood, and moderately sensitive with high specificity in BALF. Before routine implementation, further well-designed studies from diverse settings and underrepresented regions are needed.
聚合酶链反应(PCR)用于诊断毛霉病的效用尚不确定。我们进行了一项诊断试验准确性的荟萃分析,以确定毛霉目PCR的性能。
我们系统检索了PubMed、Embase和Cochrane中心数据库,以识别报告至少10例疑似毛霉病病例的毛霉目PCR(血液或支气管肺泡灌洗液[BALF]样本)的研究。我们使用贝叶斯方法(弱先验和两个信息性先验)和频率论方法汇总敏感性和特异性。亚组分析包括中等收入国家与高收入国家、危险因素(血液系统疾病与其他疾病)、研究设计、检测类型(商业检测与内部检测)以及检测方案(系列检测与单次PCR)。我们使用多变量荟萃回归评估每位参与者进行的血液检测次数对敏感性的影响。
我们识别出1524条引文,其中36项研究(41个数据集,n = 6627名参与者;16613个样本)被纳入。贝叶斯弱先验(主要分析)得出的血液样本汇总敏感性和特异性(95%可信区间)分别为51%(34 - 67%)和97%(95 - 98%);BALF样本分别为64%(50 - 76%)和97%(95 - 98%)。我们发现敏感性存在很大差异,每位患者每多检测一份血液样本,敏感性增加14%。中等收入国家的研究报告血液样本的汇总敏感性显著较低(31%对68%),BALF样本的特异性较低(72%对98%),低于高收入国家。其他亚组均未显示出显著差异。
毛霉目PCR在血液中具有高度特异性但敏感性较差,在BALF中具有中等敏感性和高特异性。在常规实施之前,需要来自不同环境和代表性不足地区的进一步精心设计的研究。