劉真君,賀光明,董 偉,趙麗麗
腦脊液PCR檢測(cè)對(duì)中樞神經(jīng)系統(tǒng)侵襲性曲霉菌感染的診斷價(jià)值
——系統(tǒng)評(píng)價(jià)和雙變量Meta分析
劉真君,賀光明,董 偉,趙麗麗
目的 系統(tǒng)評(píng)價(jià)腦脊液多聚酶鏈反應(yīng)(PCR)對(duì)中樞神經(jīng)系統(tǒng)侵襲性曲霉菌感染的診斷價(jià)值。方法 計(jì)算機(jī)檢索PubMed、The Cochrane Library、EMbase、CNKI、WanFang Data、CBM和VIP,查找評(píng)估PCR對(duì)中樞神經(jīng)系統(tǒng)侵襲性曲霉菌感染診斷價(jià)值的相關(guān)研究,檢索時(shí)限均為從建庫至2015年1月10日。由兩位評(píng)價(jià)者按照納入與排除標(biāo)準(zhǔn)獨(dú)立篩選文獻(xiàn)、提取資料并評(píng)價(jià)納入研究的方法學(xué)質(zhì)量后,采用Stata 12.0軟件統(tǒng)計(jì)并Meta分析,評(píng)估異質(zhì)性及發(fā)表偏倚。結(jié)果 最終納入8個(gè)研究,共130例病人,確診/可信病人數(shù)為27例(20.8%)。針對(duì)3篇病例對(duì)照及1篇隊(duì)列研究的Meta分析結(jié)果顯示:敏感度(Sen)、特異度(Spe)、陽性似然比(+LR)、陰性似然比(-LR)、診斷比值比(DOR)、ROC曲線下面積(AUC)分別為0.984[95%CI(0.796,0.992 )]、0.930[95% CI(0.837,0.971)]、14.09[95% CI(5.87,33.82)]、0.016[95% CI(0.001,0.843)]、847 [95% CI(16,4536)]、0.99[95% CI(0.97,0.99)]。但有一定的異質(zhì)性(I2=37%)和發(fā)表偏倚(P=0.095)存在。腦脊液PCR陽性率顯著高于腦脊液GM檢測(cè)(P=0.018)和血PCR檢測(cè)(P=0.02)。結(jié)論 腦脊液PCR對(duì)中樞神經(jīng)系統(tǒng)侵襲性曲霉菌感染有較高的診斷價(jià)值。但PCR檢測(cè)方法學(xué)上存在異質(zhì)性,發(fā)表偏倚可能高估PCR方法的診斷價(jià)值,上述結(jié)論仍需謹(jǐn)慎看待。
真菌感染;中樞神經(jīng)系統(tǒng);侵襲性曲霉菌;多聚酶鏈反應(yīng);系統(tǒng)評(píng)價(jià)
近年來,隨著器官移植的開展、免疫抑制劑的使用,腫瘤(特別是血液系統(tǒng)腫瘤)發(fā)病率的上升,侵襲性曲霉菌(invasive aspergillosis,IA)導(dǎo)致的死亡有明顯上升的趨勢(shì)[1]。 侵襲性曲霉菌主要累及肺和鼻竇,中樞神經(jīng)系統(tǒng)IA相對(duì)較少,但其預(yù)后極差,死亡率接近100%[2-3]。在使用伏立康唑后,預(yù)后有明顯改善,但死亡率仍為29.2%~69.0%[4-5]。
早期診斷是改善中樞神經(jīng)系統(tǒng)IA預(yù)后的關(guān)鍵,目前診斷真菌感染較公認(rèn)的為EORTC/MSG標(biāo)準(zhǔn)[6],但其對(duì)早期、準(zhǔn)確的診斷真菌感染尚有爭(zhēng)議[7]。多聚酶鏈反應(yīng)(polymerase chain reaction,PCR)采用特異性擴(kuò)增方法能快速、準(zhǔn)確檢測(cè)出曲霉菌的DNA成分,系統(tǒng)評(píng)價(jià)表明了PCR方法在血和支氣管肺泡灌洗液中對(duì)IA和肺IA有較好的診斷價(jià)值[8-9]。本研究探討腦脊液PCR檢測(cè)對(duì)中樞神經(jīng)系統(tǒng)IA的診斷價(jià)值。
1.1 納入與排除標(biāo)準(zhǔn) 納入探討PCR對(duì)中樞神經(jīng)系統(tǒng)IA感染診斷價(jià)值的研究,無語種限制。排除標(biāo)準(zhǔn):①動(dòng)物實(shí)驗(yàn)及基礎(chǔ)研究;② 重復(fù)發(fā)表及重復(fù)檢出的文獻(xiàn)。
1.2 檢索策略 計(jì)算機(jī)檢索PubMed、The Cochrane Library、EMbase、CNKI、WanFang Data、CBM和VIP,檢索時(shí)限均為從建庫至2015年1月10日,并檢索納入研究的參考文獻(xiàn)。檢索詞為主題詞和自由詞:聚合酶鏈反應(yīng)(polymerase chain reaction)和中樞神經(jīng)系統(tǒng)真菌感染(central nervous system fungal infections)或曲霉(aspergillosis/aspergillus)。
1.3 文獻(xiàn)篩選、質(zhì)量評(píng)價(jià)和資料提取 由兩位研究者根據(jù)納入與排除標(biāo)準(zhǔn)獨(dú)立進(jìn)行文獻(xiàn)篩選,如遇分歧討論解決。文獻(xiàn)質(zhì)量評(píng)價(jià)參照QUADAS-2工具[10]。采用自制的資料提取表提取資料,提取內(nèi)容包括第一作者、研究時(shí)間、研究對(duì)象、研究設(shè)計(jì)、金標(biāo)準(zhǔn)、樣本量、TP、FP、FN、TN值,PCR技術(shù)和方法。資料不全時(shí)通過電子郵件與作者聯(lián)系。
1.4 統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)處理 采用Stata12.0軟件進(jìn)行統(tǒng)計(jì)分析,定量資料比較采用Kruskal-Wallis秩和檢驗(yàn),定量資料的比較采用χ2檢驗(yàn)或Fisher確切概率法。Meta分析用Stata的midas模塊,發(fā)表偏倚識(shí)別用pubbias選項(xiàng)。計(jì)算合并Sen、Spe、+LR、-LR和DOR,并繪制分層綜合受試者操作特征曲線(HSROC,hierarchical summary receiver operating curves)。檢驗(yàn)水準(zhǔn)為α=0.05,雙側(cè)檢驗(yàn),P<0.05為有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義。
2.1 文獻(xiàn)檢索結(jié)果 初檢出相關(guān)文獻(xiàn)61篇,經(jīng)閱讀摘要及全文,共納入8個(gè)研究[11-18]。詳見表1、表2。4篇個(gè)案及3篇病例對(duì)照研究,1篇隊(duì)列研究,共130例病人,確診/可信病人數(shù)為27例(20.8%)。
表1 納入研究特征
表2 PCR技術(shù)和方法
2.2 納入研究基本特征及質(zhì)量評(píng)價(jià) 4個(gè)研究的文獻(xiàn)質(zhì)量評(píng)價(jià)參照QUADAS-2工具,QUADAS-2工具從病人選擇、實(shí)驗(yàn)指標(biāo)(Index test,即待評(píng)價(jià)的診斷方法)、參考標(biāo)準(zhǔn)(reference standard,即金標(biāo)準(zhǔn))和流程時(shí)間(flow and timing,即是否同步評(píng)價(jià)診斷方法和金標(biāo)準(zhǔn),隨訪時(shí)間是否合理等)四個(gè)區(qū)域,偏倚風(fēng)險(xiǎn)(risk of bias)和適用性(applicability)兩方面評(píng)價(jià)研究的質(zhì)量(分為高危、低危和不確定)。詳見表3。Kami 等[12]研究納入已確診病例,未采用盲法評(píng)價(jià),有較高的偏倚風(fēng)險(xiǎn),Badiee等[17]研究納入腦外傷及腦腫瘤病人,適用性方面存在高風(fēng)險(xiǎn),未報(bào)道實(shí)驗(yàn)指標(biāo)和參考標(biāo)準(zhǔn)是否同步檢測(cè),其偏倚風(fēng)險(xiǎn)和適應(yīng)性方面不確定。
表3 納入Meta分析研究的質(zhì)量評(píng)價(jià)
2.3 Meta分析 將4個(gè)研究納入Meta分析,腦脊液PCR用于中樞神經(jīng)系統(tǒng)曲霉菌感染總的診斷價(jià)值:敏感度(Sen)、特異度(Spe)、陽性似然比(+LR)、陰性似然比(-LR)、診斷比值比(DOR)、ROC曲線下面積(AUC)分別為0.984[95%CI(0.796,0.992 )]、0.930[95% CI(0.837,0.971)]、14.09[95% CI(5.87,33.82)]、0.016[95% CI(0.001,0.843)]、847 [95% CI(16,4536)]、0.99[95% CI(0.97,0.99)]。分層綜合受試者操作特征曲線(hierarchical summary receiver operating curves,HSROC)見圖1。
圖1 分層綜合受試者操作特征曲線圖
2.4 與其他檢測(cè)方法的比較 多個(gè)研究[11,13-14,16-18]比較腦脊液PCR與腦脊液半乳甘露聚糖(GM,galactomannan)檢測(cè),腦脊液PCR和血PCR檢測(cè)在中樞神經(jīng)系統(tǒng)IA感染的診斷價(jià)值。在確診/可信中樞神經(jīng)系統(tǒng)曲霉感染病人中,腦脊液PCR陽性率顯著高于腦脊液GM檢測(cè)(16/16和10/16,P=0.018),腦脊液PCR陽性率顯著高于血PCR檢測(cè)(9/10和3/10,P=0.02)。
2.5 異質(zhì)性分析 異質(zhì)性檢驗(yàn)Q=0.835(P=0.329),I2=37%,提示有一定的異質(zhì)性。各研究主要為血液疾病病人,年齡[12,16-17][38(四分位間距38,50) 對(duì)37.5(12,63) 對(duì)25.5(7,39)]和性別構(gòu)成(男/女,3/2 對(duì) 2/4 對(duì) 7/3)無統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P>0.05)。各研究的中樞神經(jīng)系統(tǒng)病變類型(孤立腦膿腫/多發(fā)腦膿腫/出血性梗死,1/2/2 對(duì) 3/3/0 對(duì) 1/4/0),原發(fā)或繼發(fā)中樞神經(jīng)系統(tǒng)IA(0/5 對(duì) 3/3 對(duì) 3/11)無統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P>0.05)[12,16,18]。
8個(gè)研究的PCR技術(shù)方法存在一定的異質(zhì)性。腦脊液樣本量(報(bào)道為1 mL~2 mL),DNA提取方法(離心或非離心,主要使用酶消化法和酚-氯仿提取),引物設(shè)計(jì)(主要為煙曲霉18s rRNA基因),DNA擴(kuò)增方法(標(biāo)準(zhǔn)、巢式或?qū)崟r(shí)定量PCR),是否有對(duì)照(陰性或陽性對(duì)照)等不同研究間有差異,但由于研究較少,難以做亞組及敏感性分析。Hummel 等[16]的研究比較了巢式PCR和實(shí)時(shí)定量PCR,發(fā)現(xiàn)巢式PCR有更高的敏感性。
2.6 發(fā)表偏倚的識(shí)別 發(fā)表偏倚檢驗(yàn)的t值為-3.01(95%CI-49.90,8.85),P=0.095,提示可能有發(fā)表偏倚存在。
EORTC/MSG診斷標(biāo)準(zhǔn)結(jié)合了宿主因素,臨床表現(xiàn)和真菌學(xué)依據(jù),診斷分為確診(proven,無菌部位的顯微鏡分析或培養(yǎng)),臨床診斷/可信(probable,非無菌部位有真菌學(xué)依據(jù),包括痰液、尿液等顯微鏡分析或培養(yǎng)直接證據(jù),葡聚糖DG /和半乳甘露聚糖抗原GM檢測(cè)等間接證據(jù)),擬診(possible,僅有宿主因素,臨床表現(xiàn)或影像學(xué)表現(xiàn))。但針對(duì)IA感染的病人,臨床和影像學(xué)表現(xiàn)缺乏特異性,培養(yǎng)陽性率極低,針對(duì)擬診的高危病人,臨床上采用了經(jīng)驗(yàn)性治療方案,但增加了抗真菌藥物不必要的使用,造成醫(yī)療資源的浪費(fèi)和藥物不良反應(yīng)的增加。分子水平的診斷方法(曲霉抗原和DNA)能將擬診提升到可信,避免上述問題的發(fā)生,但血DG 和GM實(shí)驗(yàn)的敏感性有限,有部分假陽性[19]。并且,有研究表明IA感染的病人中,血PCR陽性較GM陽性早68 d[20],提示PCR較其他方法更有早期診斷的價(jià)值。
傳統(tǒng)的SROC(summary ROC)模型用于診斷試驗(yàn)的Meta分析有較多的方法學(xué)問題,如受到閾值效應(yīng)的影響,沒有考慮研究估計(jì)值的準(zhǔn)確度,不能估計(jì)研究間的異質(zhì)性,回歸中解釋變量測(cè)量錯(cuò)誤,導(dǎo)致置信區(qū)間和P值的偏移[21]。本研究采用了雙變量隨機(jī)效應(yīng)模型和HSROC模型,其估計(jì)了平均敏感度、特異度和受試點(diǎn),估計(jì)了參數(shù)中不能解釋的變量及其相關(guān)性。本研究表明,腦脊液PCR檢測(cè)方法對(duì)中樞神經(jīng)系統(tǒng)IA有較高的診斷價(jià)值,綜合敏感度和特異度為0.984和0.930。陽性預(yù)測(cè)值>10和陰性預(yù)測(cè)值<0.1通常認(rèn)為可以確立和排除診斷[22],PCR方法的綜合+LR和-LR分別為 14.09和0.016,可用于肯定或否定中樞神經(jīng)系統(tǒng)IA的診斷。
本研究表明對(duì)中樞神經(jīng)系統(tǒng)IA的診斷,腦脊液的PCR優(yōu)于血PCR檢測(cè)和腦脊液GM檢測(cè)。既往研究表明針對(duì)肺部IA,支氣管肺泡灌洗液(bronchoalveolar lavage fliud,BAL)的GM檢測(cè)診斷價(jià)值優(yōu)于血清GM檢測(cè)[23],BAL的PCR檢測(cè)診斷表現(xiàn)與BAL的GM檢測(cè)相似或略優(yōu)[24-25]。對(duì)早期肺部IA,BAL的PCR檢測(cè)陽性,而血的PCR檢測(cè)為陰性[26]。提示局部IA感染,感染部位的抗原/DNA檢測(cè)可能更有早期診斷的價(jià)值。
本研究的局限性:①納入研究的總體質(zhì)量和樣本量不足,可能有發(fā)表偏倚的存在。但由于中樞神經(jīng)系統(tǒng)IA低的發(fā)病率和臨床識(shí)別困難,開展大樣本、前瞻性研究可行性較困難,系統(tǒng)評(píng)價(jià)和Meta分析的目的就是全面收集相關(guān)研究,提高總的樣本量和統(tǒng)計(jì)效能,減少抽樣誤差,進(jìn)一步說明了本研究的必要性。②PCR的技術(shù)和方法上各研究間有較大的差異性。實(shí)際上,PCR方法的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)化問題是其未能進(jìn)入EORTC/MSG診斷標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的主要原因。研究表明,針對(duì)全血PCR方法的敏感性與DNA提取方式(使用bead beating,增加的樣本量和減少稀釋液量)和內(nèi)對(duì)照(排除假陰性)正相關(guān),與DNA的擴(kuò)增方式無關(guān)[27],針對(duì)血漿PCR方法標(biāo)準(zhǔn)化步驟減少(沒有白細(xì)胞DNA的干擾),其敏感性與DNA提取方法、靶位點(diǎn)為真菌的內(nèi)轉(zhuǎn)錄間隔區(qū)(ITS,internal transcribed spacer )、內(nèi)對(duì)照正相關(guān)[28]。但目前沒有針對(duì)腦脊液DNA方法標(biāo)準(zhǔn)化的相關(guān)研究。
PCR方法對(duì)中樞神經(jīng)系統(tǒng)IA有較高的診斷價(jià)值,但對(duì)非血液疾病病人(ICU或?qū)嶓w器官移植)的診斷價(jià)值,以PCR診斷方法為基礎(chǔ)的治療能否改善病人的預(yù)后,PCR診斷方法的污染和標(biāo)準(zhǔn)化等方面還需要更多的研究。
[1] McNeil MM,Nash SL,Hajjeh RA,et al.Trends in mortality due to invasive mycotic diseases in the United States 1980-1997[J].Clin Infect Dis,2001,33(5):641-647.
[2] Lin SJ,Schranz J,Teutsch SM.Aspergillosis case-fatality rate:systematic review of the literature[J].Clin Infect Dis,2001,32(3):358-366.
[3] Denning DW.Therapeutic outcome in invasive aspergillosis[J].Clin Infect Dis,1996,23(3):608-615.
[4] Schwartz S,Ruhnke M,Ribaud P,et al.Improved outcome in central nervous system aspergillosis,using voriconazole treatment[J].Blood,2005,106(8):2641-2645.
[5] Herbrecht R,Denning DW,Patterson TF,et al.Voriconazole versus amphotericin B for primary therapy of invasive aspergillosis[J].N Engl J Med,2002,347(6):408-415.
[6] De Pauw B,Walsh TJ,Donnelly JP,et al.Revised definitions of invasive fungal disease from the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer/Invasive Fungal Infections Cooperative Group and the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Mycoses Study Group (EORTC/MSG) Consensus Group[J].Clin Infect Dis,2008,46(12):1813-1821.
[7] Rieger H, Lustig D,Barlow S,et al.Applicability of the EORTC/MSG criteria for IFD in clinical practice[J].Ann Hematol,2015,94(5):847-855.
[8] Sun W,Wang K,Gao W,et al.Evaluation of PCR on bronchoalveolar lavage fluid for diagnosis of invasive aspergillosis:a bivariate meta analysis and systematic review[J].PLoS One,2011,6(12):e28467.
[9] Mengoli C,Cruciani M,Barnes RA,et al.Use of PCR for diagnosis of invasive aspergillosis:systematic review and meta-analysis[J].Lancet Infect Dis,2009,9(2):89-96.
[10] Whiting PF,Rutjes AW,Westwood ME,et al.QUADAS-2:a revised tool for the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies[J].Ann Intern Med,2011,155(8):529-536.
[11] Verweij PE,Dompeling EC,Donnelly JP,et al.Serial monitoring of Aspergillus antigen in the early diagnosis of invasive aspergillosis.Preliminary investigations with two examples[J].Infection,1997,25(2):86-89.
[12] Kami M,Ogawa S,Kanda Y,et al.Early diagnosis of central nervous system aspergillosis using polymerase chain reaction,latex agglutination test,and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay[J].Br J Haematol,1999,106(2):536-537.
[13] Verweij PE,Brinkman K,Kremer HP,et al.Aspergillus meningitis:diagnosis by non-culture-based microbiological methods and management[J].J Clin Microbiol,1999,37(4):1186-1189.
[14] Moling O,Lass-Floerl C,Verweij PE,et al.Case Reports.Chronic and acute Aspergillus meningitis[J].Mycoses,2002,45(11-12):504-511.
[15] Komatsu H,F(xiàn)ujisawa T,Inui A,et al.Molecular diagnosis of cerebral aspergillosis by sequence analysis with panfungal polymerase chain reaction[J].J Pediatr Hematol Oncol,2004,26(1):40-44.
[16] Hummel M,Spiess B,Kentouche K,et al.Detection of Aspergillus DNA in cerebrospinal fluid from patients with cerebral aspergillosis by a nested PCR assay[J].J Clin Microbiol,2006,44(11):3989-3993.
[17] Badiee P,Alborzi A.Assessment of a real-time PCR method to detect human non-cryptococcal fungal meningitis[J].Arch Iran Med,2011,14(6):381-384.
[18] Reinwald M,Buchheidt D,Hummel M,et al.Diagnostic performance of an Aspergillus-specific nested PCR assay in cerebrospinal fluid samples of immunocompromised patients for detection of central nervous system aspergillosis[J].PLoS One,2013,8(2):e56706.
[19] Johnson G,F(xiàn)errini A,Dolan SK,et al.Biomarkers for invasive aspergillosis:the challenges continue[J].Biomark Med,2014,8(3):429-451.
[20] Cuenca-Estrella M,Meije Y,Diaz-Pedroche C,et al.Value of serial quantification of fungal DNA by a real-time PCR-based technique for early diagnosis of invasive Aspergillosis in patients with febrile neutropenia[J].J Clin Microbiol,2009,47(2):379-384.
[21] Leeflang MM,Deeks JJ,Gatsonis C,et al.Systematic reviews of diagnostic test accuracy[J].Ann Intern Med,2008,149(12):889-897.
[22] Jaeschke R,Guyatt GH,Sackett DL.Users’ guides to the medical literature Ⅲ.How to use an article about a diagnostic test B.What are the results and will they help me in caring for my patients? The Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group[J].JAMA,1994,271(9):703-707.
[23] Acosta J,Catalan M,del Palacio-Perez-Medel A,et al.A prospective comparison of galactomannan in bronchoalveolar lavage fluid for the diagnosis of pulmonary invasive aspergillosis in medical patients under intensive care:comparison with the diagnostic performance of galactomannan and of (1--> 3)-beta-d-glucan chromogenic assay in serum samples[J].Clin Microbiol Infect,2011,17(7):1053-1060.
[24] Heng SC,Chen SC,Morrissey CO,et al.Clinical utility of Aspergillus galactomannan and PCR in bronchoalveolar lavage fluid for the diagnosis of invasive pulmonary aspergillosis in patients with haematological malignancies[J].Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis,2014,79(3):322-327.
[25] Avni T,Levy I,Sprecher H,et al.Diagnostic accuracy of PCR alone compared to galactomannan in bronchoalveolar lavage fluid for diagnosis of invasive pulmonary aspergillosis:a systematic review[J].J Clin Microbiol,2012,50(11):3652-3658.
[26] Sav H,Atalay MA,Unal E,et al.The importance of bronchoalveolar lavage sample for galactomannan,1,3-ss-d-glucan and PCR tests].Mikrobiyol Bul,2012,46(4):695-701.
[27] White PL,Bretagne S,Klingspor L,et al.Aspergillus PCR:one step closer to standardization[J].J Clin Microbiol,2010,48(4):1231-1240.
[28] White PL,Mengoli C,Bretagne S,et al.Evaluation of Aspergillus PCR protocols for testing serum specimens[J].J Clin Microbiol,2011,49(11):3842-3848.
(本文編輯王雅潔)
Diagnostic Value of Cerebrospinal Fluid PCR Detection for Invasive Aspergillosis in the Central Nervous System:Systematic Review and Bivariate Meta-analysis
Liu Zhenjun,He Guangming,Dong Wei,Zhao Lili
Sichuan Cancer Hospital,Chengdu 610041,Sichuan,China
Objective Systematic review about diagnostic value of cerebrospinal fluid PCR detection for invasive aspergillosis in the central nervous system (CNS).Methods Computer retrieval of PubMed,The Cochrane Library,EMbase,CNKI,Wan Fang Data,CBM and VIP was conducted.Studies published from initiation of the databases until January 10,2015,assessing diagnostic performance of CSF PCR detection for invasive aspergillosis in the central nervous system were searched.Two reviewers independently searched literature on the grounds of inclusion and exclusion standards,extracted information and evaluated methodological quality of included studies.statistical calculation and meta-analysis were conducted via Stata 12.0 software and heterogeneity and publication bias were assessed.Results Totally eight studies were enrolled,with proven/probable 27 cases (20.8%) in 130 patients.Meta-analysis based on 3 case-control studies and 1 cohort study showed:sensitivity (Sen),specific (Spe),positive likelihood ratio (+ LR),negative likelihood ratio (-LR) and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR),the area under the ROC curve (AUC) were 0.984 [95% CI(0.796,0.992)],0.930 [95% CI(0.837,0.971)],14.09 [95% CI(5.87,33.82)],0.016 [95% CI(0.001,0.843)] and 847 [95% CI(16,453 6)],0.99 [95% CI(0.97,0.99)],respectively.But there were moderate heterogeneity (I2= 37%)and publication bias (P=0.095).PCR positive rate in CSF was significantly higher than that of GM test in CSF(P=0.018) and blood PCR detection (P=0.02).Conclusion PCR test in CSF for invasive aspergillosis of the central nervous system has high diagnostic value.However,due to methodological heterogeneity of PCR detection and possibly overestimated diagnostic performance of PCR by publication bias,aforementioned conclusion must be drawn conscientiously.
fungal infection;central nervous system;invasive aspergillosis;polymerase chain reaction;systematie review
四川省腫瘤醫(yī)院(成都 610041),E-mail:lantianboyun@163.com
引用信息:劉真君,賀光明,董偉,等.腦脊液PCR檢測(cè)對(duì)中樞神經(jīng)系統(tǒng)侵襲性曲霉菌感染的診斷價(jià)值:系統(tǒng)評(píng)價(jià)和雙變量Meta分析[J].中西醫(yī)結(jié)合心腦血管病雜志,2017,15(9):1041-1045.
R473 R255
A
10.3969/j.issn.1672-1349.2017.09.007
1672-1349(2017)09-1041-05
2016-02-22)