皮肤真菌感染的组织化学检测:荟萃分析。

IF 1.1 4区 医学 Q3 DERMATOLOGY
Manisha V. Vadali, Melissa A. Gener, Garth R. Fraga
{"title":"皮肤真菌感染的组织化学检测:荟萃分析。","authors":"Manisha V. Vadali,&nbsp;Melissa A. Gener,&nbsp;Garth R. Fraga","doi":"10.1111/cup.14826","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Specialized histochemistry testing for cutaneous fungal infection is common, but the comparative diagnostic accuracy of different test modalities such as periodic acid-Schiff (PAS) and Grocott methenamine silver (GMS) remains uncertain.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>We performed a meta-analysis of 23 studies involving 4404 patients who underwent histochemical testing for onychomycosis and seven studies involving 1221 patients who underwent histochemical testing for deep fungal infection.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>The analysis revealed a sensitivity of 0.84 (95% CI: 0.78–0.88) for PAS detection of onychomycosis vs. 0.73 (95% CI: 0.67–0.78) for GMS detection of onychomycosis. Studies on onychomycosis did not include a separate reference standard, and specificity could not be calculated. PAS showed higher estimated sensitivity (0.73) for diagnosis of deep fungal infection than GMS (0.49), but results were associated with broad, overlapping confidence intervals. Methodological issues prevented reliable conclusions on their accuracy in this setting.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>While the choice of test for onychomycosis depends on user preference, if all factors are equal, PAS should be selected over GMS. The existing literature on histochemistry testing for deep fungal infection does not allow for reliable conclusions on its accuracy, and there is a compelling need for well-designed diagnostic accuracy studies in this area.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":15407,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cutaneous Pathology","volume":"52 8","pages":"539-547"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Histochemistry Testing for Cutaneous Fungal Infections: A Meta-Analysis\",\"authors\":\"Manisha V. Vadali,&nbsp;Melissa A. Gener,&nbsp;Garth R. Fraga\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/cup.14826\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Background</h3>\\n \\n <p>Specialized histochemistry testing for cutaneous fungal infection is common, but the comparative diagnostic accuracy of different test modalities such as periodic acid-Schiff (PAS) and Grocott methenamine silver (GMS) remains uncertain.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>We performed a meta-analysis of 23 studies involving 4404 patients who underwent histochemical testing for onychomycosis and seven studies involving 1221 patients who underwent histochemical testing for deep fungal infection.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>The analysis revealed a sensitivity of 0.84 (95% CI: 0.78–0.88) for PAS detection of onychomycosis vs. 0.73 (95% CI: 0.67–0.78) for GMS detection of onychomycosis. Studies on onychomycosis did not include a separate reference standard, and specificity could not be calculated. PAS showed higher estimated sensitivity (0.73) for diagnosis of deep fungal infection than GMS (0.49), but results were associated with broad, overlapping confidence intervals. Methodological issues prevented reliable conclusions on their accuracy in this setting.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\\n \\n <p>While the choice of test for onychomycosis depends on user preference, if all factors are equal, PAS should be selected over GMS. The existing literature on histochemistry testing for deep fungal infection does not allow for reliable conclusions on its accuracy, and there is a compelling need for well-designed diagnostic accuracy studies in this area.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15407,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Cutaneous Pathology\",\"volume\":\"52 8\",\"pages\":\"539-547\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Cutaneous Pathology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/cup.14826\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"DERMATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Cutaneous Pathology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/cup.14826","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DERMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:皮肤真菌感染的专门组织化学检测是常见的,但不同检测方式的比较诊断准确性,如周期性酸-希夫(PAS)和Grocott甲基苯丙胺银(GMS)仍不确定。方法:我们对23项研究进行了荟萃分析,涉及4404例进行了甲真菌病组织化学检测的患者,以及7项研究涉及1221例进行了深部真菌感染组织化学检测的患者。结果:分析显示PAS检测甲真菌病的敏感性为0.84 (95% CI: 0.78-0.88),而GMS检测甲真菌病的敏感性为0.73 (95% CI: 0.67-0.78)。对甲真菌病的研究没有单独的参考标准,特异性无法计算。PAS在诊断深部真菌感染方面的估计敏感性(0.73)高于GMS(0.49),但结果与广泛的重叠置信区间相关。方法上的问题妨碍了在这种情况下对其准确性得出可靠的结论。结论:甲真菌病的检测方法的选择取决于用户的偏好,在所有因素相同的情况下,应选择PAS而不是GMS。现有的关于深部真菌感染的组织化学检测的文献并没有给出其准确性的可靠结论,迫切需要在这一领域进行精心设计的诊断准确性研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Histochemistry Testing for Cutaneous Fungal Infections: A Meta-Analysis

Background

Specialized histochemistry testing for cutaneous fungal infection is common, but the comparative diagnostic accuracy of different test modalities such as periodic acid-Schiff (PAS) and Grocott methenamine silver (GMS) remains uncertain.

Methods

We performed a meta-analysis of 23 studies involving 4404 patients who underwent histochemical testing for onychomycosis and seven studies involving 1221 patients who underwent histochemical testing for deep fungal infection.

Results

The analysis revealed a sensitivity of 0.84 (95% CI: 0.78–0.88) for PAS detection of onychomycosis vs. 0.73 (95% CI: 0.67–0.78) for GMS detection of onychomycosis. Studies on onychomycosis did not include a separate reference standard, and specificity could not be calculated. PAS showed higher estimated sensitivity (0.73) for diagnosis of deep fungal infection than GMS (0.49), but results were associated with broad, overlapping confidence intervals. Methodological issues prevented reliable conclusions on their accuracy in this setting.

Conclusions

While the choice of test for onychomycosis depends on user preference, if all factors are equal, PAS should be selected over GMS. The existing literature on histochemistry testing for deep fungal infection does not allow for reliable conclusions on its accuracy, and there is a compelling need for well-designed diagnostic accuracy studies in this area.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
5.90%
发文量
174
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Cutaneous Pathology publishes manuscripts broadly relevant to diseases of the skin and mucosae, with the aims of advancing scientific knowledge regarding dermatopathology and enhancing the communication between clinical practitioners and research scientists. Original scientific manuscripts on diagnostic and experimental cutaneous pathology are especially desirable. Timely, pertinent review articles also will be given high priority. Manuscripts based on light, fluorescence, and electron microscopy, histochemistry, immunology, molecular biology, and genetics, as well as allied sciences, are all welcome, provided their principal focus is on cutaneous pathology. Publication time will be kept as short as possible, ensuring that articles will be quickly available to all interested in this speciality.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信