Pneumocystis carinii diagnosis: an update

Non-invasive diagnosis of Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia (PCP) is an opportunistic infection commonly affecting immunocompromised people. Diagnosis usually requires invasive techniques to obtain respiratory specimens. Minimally invasive detection tests have been proposed, but their operating characteristics are poorly described.

OBJECTIVES

To systematically review and meta-analyse the performance of minimally invasive PCP detection tests to inform diagnostic algorithms.

DATA SOURCES

Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library (inception to 15 October 2020).

STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Studies of minimally invasive PCP detection tests were included if they contained a minimum of ten PCP cases.

PARTICIPANTS

Adults at risk of PCP.

TESTS

Non-invasive PCP detection tests.

REFERENCE STANDARD

Diagnosis using the combination of clinical and radiographical features with invasive sampling.

ASSESSMENT OF RISK BIAS

Using the QUADAS-2 tool.

METHODS

We used bivariate and, when necessary, univariate analysis models to estimate diagnostic test sensitivity and specificity.

RESULTS

Fifty-two studies were included; most studies (40) comprised exclusively human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) -infected individuals; nine were mixed (HIV and non-HIV), two were non-HIV and one study did not report HIV status. Sampling sites included induced sputum, nasopharyngeal aspirate, oral wash and blood. The four testing modalities evaluated were cytological staining, fluorescent antibody, PCR and lactate dehydrogenase. Induced sputum had the most data available; this modality was both highly sensitive at 99% (95% CI 51%-100%) and specific at 96% (95% CI 88%-99%). Induced sputum cytological staining had moderate sensitivity at 50% (95% CI 39%-61%) and high specificity at 100% (95% CI 100%-100%), as did fluorescent antibody testing with sensitivity 74% (95% CI 62%-87%) and specificity 100% (95% CI 91%-100%).

CONCLUSION

There are several promising minimally invasive PCP diagnostic tests available, some of which may reduce the need for invasive respiratory sampling. Understanding the operating characteristics of these tests can augment current diagnostic strategies and help establish a more confident clinical diagnosis of PCP. Further studies in non-HIV infected populations are needed.

ECIL guidelines for the diagnosis of Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia in patients with haematological malignancies and stem cell transplant recipients

The Fifth European Conference on Infections in Leukaemia (ECIL-5) convened a meeting to establish evidence-based recommendations for using tests to diagnose Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia (PCP) in adult patients with haematological malignancies. Immunofluorescence assays are recommended as the most sensitive microscopic method (recommendation A-II: ). Real-time PCR is recommended for the routine diagnosis of PCP ( A-II: ). Bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) fluid is recommended as the best specimen as it yields good negative predictive value ( A-II: ). Non-invasive specimens can be suitable alternatives ( B-II: ), acknowledging that PCP cannot be ruled out in case of a negative PCR result ( A-II: ). Detecting β-d-glucan in serum can contribute to the diagnosis but not the follow-up of PCP ( A-II: ). A negative serum β-d-glucan result can exclude PCP in a patient at risk ( A-II: ), whereas a positive test result may indicate other fungal infections. Genotyping using multilocus sequence markers can be used to investigate suspected outbreaks ( A-II: ). The routine detection of dihydropteroate synthase mutations in cases of treatment failure is not recommended ( B-II: ) since these mutations do not affect response to high-dose co-trimoxazole. The clinical utility of these diagnostic tests for the early management of PCP should be further assessed in prospective, randomized interventional studies.

Evaluation of PCR in bronchoalveolar lavage fluid for diagnosis of Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia: a bivariate meta-analysis and systematic review

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.

PCR diagnosis of Pneumocystis pneumonia: a bivariate meta-analysis

We undertook a bivariate meta-analysis to assess the overall accuracy of respiratory specimen PCR assays for diagnosing Pneumocystis pneumonia. The summary sensitivity and specificity were 0.99 (95% confidence interval, 0.96 to 1.00) and 0.90 (0.87 to 0.93). Subgroup analyses showed that quantitative PCR analysis and the major surface glycoprotein gene target had the highest specificity value (0.93). Respiratory specimen PCR results are sufficient to confirm or exclude the disease for at-risk patients suspected of having Pneumocystis pneumonia.

[Pnemocystis jiroveci pneumonia: Comparison between conventional PCR and staining techniques]

Diagnosis of pneumocystis pneumonia is usually based on clinical features and X-rays photography and confirmed in the laboratory by visualisation of Pneumocystis organisms in stained preparations of respiratory specimens using several techniques (Gomori-Grocott, May-Grünwald Giemsa, bleu de toluidine O). Actually, PCR has considerably increased sensitivity of detection of Pneumocystis. The aim of this study is to compare conventional PCR results to those of staining techniques (Gomori-Grocott, May-Grünwald Giemsa) in addition to the X-ray and clinical findings in order to evaluate the contribution of each method. Sixty-four respiratory specimens were collected from 54 immuno-compromised patients with clinical symptoms of pulmonary infection. We diagnosed pneumocystis pneumonia in 16 patients according to staining techniques and/or typical clinical and radiological findings and/or response to treatment. Of the 15 patients, 14 were positive by PCR and only five were positive by direct examination, yielding a sensitivity and specificity of 93.3 and 87.1% for PCR and 33.3 and 100% for staining techniques. Conventional PCR provides a sensitive and objective method for the detection Pneumocystis jiroveci from less invasive sample.

Evaluation of persistent pulmonary infiltrates in pediatric oncology patients

PURPOSE

To evaluate the role of bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL), computed-tomography-guided biopsy (CTB), and open lung biopsy (OLB) in the management of persistent pulmonary infiltrates in pediatric oncology patients.

METHODS

Retrospective review of clinical records of pediatric oncology patients who underwent BAL, CTB, and OLB over a 7-year period. Data was compared across the three procedures using chi-square analysis. Logistic regression was used to adjust potential confounding variables for diagnostic yield.

RESULTS

There were 113 consecutive patients who underwent 140 separate procedures during their hospitalization. Thirty (26%) patients had a previous BMT. BALs were more likely to occur as the first line of investigation (98% vs. 47%, 45%; P < 0.01) and in patients with diffuse infiltrates (64% vs. 6%, 26%; P < 0.01) when compared to CTB and OLB, respectively. OLBs were performed less frequently in neutropenic patients (26% vs. 53%, 54%; P < 0.05), more often led to change in management directly because of procedure (61% vs. 12%, 33%; P < 0.01), and had higher diagnostic yield (61% vs. 24%, 36%; P < 0.01) when compared to CTB and BAL, respectively. Diagnostic yield of OLB was significantly higher regardless of diffuse or focal nature of infiltrate. Major adverse events after a procedure were not significantly different across the three procedures. Logistic regression demonstrated that having an OLB was independently associated with identifying the cause of pulmonary infiltrate.

CONCLUSION

OLB appears to be safe, has the best diagnostic yield, and leads to change in management more often than CTB or BAL in pediatric oncology patients with persistent pulmonary infiltrates.